^^"^rl 


O 


f  PR-tNCETON.    N.    J.                   4 

\  ADDlSON^'- AI^.X^lNDER    LIBRARY.     | 

A  *      whi'h  Aras  presented  bj                    /■ 

|/  Messrs.  K.  1.    and  A.  Stuabt.             J 

1  CVf.sv%           Divisiop^^^''^*^^'^ 


NOTES, 

CRITICAL   AND   PRACTICAL, 


ON  THE   BOOK  OF 


LEVITICUS 


DESIGNED  AS  A  CCNERAI-  HELP  TO 


BIBLICAL    READING    AND    INSTRUCTION. 


By   GEORGE   BUSH, 

PROr,   OF   HTD,    AND   ORIENT.   LIT.  N.  Y.   CITY   UNIVERSITY. 


NEW-YORK: 

PUBLISHED  BY  NEWMAN  AND  IVISON, 

199   Broadway. 

CINCINNATI :  MOORE  &  ANDERSON.    AUBURN  :  J.  C.  IVISON  &  CO 

CUICAGO  :  S.  C.  GRIGGS  &  CO  DETROIT  :  A.  McFARRBN. 

1852. 


Entered  according  to  act  of  Congress, 
Is  the  yc»r  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-twO;  by 

GEORGE   BUSH, 

In  .heCjcrn's  office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  Southern  District  of  New- York. 


t.  W.  BENEDICT,  9TERECTYPER  AlfD  PIUIVTEB 

No.  128  Fulton  Street,  N.  Y. 


INTRODUCTION 


§  1.  Title,  Author,  Date,  SfC. 


The  Hebrews,  according  to  their  usual  custom,  denominate  this,  the  third  book 
in  the  order  of  the  Pentateuch,  S^lp'iT  va-yikra,  and  he  called,  from  its  initial 
word.  By  the  Septuagint  it  is  culled  AcvXtikov,  leuitikon  (levitikori),  of  which 
the  Vulgate  title  '  Leviticus'  is  the  Latinized  form  ;  and  this  has  been  retained 
by  our  own  and  all  the  modern  versions.  It  is  so  called  from  the  fact  that  it 
treats  principally  of  the  rites  and  ceremonies,  the  services  and  sacrifices,  of  the 
religion  of  the  Israelites,  the  charge  of  which  was  committed  to  the  Levitical 
priesthood,  that  is,  to  Aaron  and  his  sons,  or  descendants,  who  were  of  the  tribe 
of  Levi,  and  who  alone  of  that  tribe  exercised  the  priestly  office.  It  is  not, 
therefore,  the  ministry  of  the  Levites  properly  so  called,  who  constituted  a  dis- 
tinct order  from  the  priests,  and  subordinate  to  them,  that  forms  the  subject  of 
this  book,  for  of  their  services  a  much  fuller  account  is  contained  in  the  book  of 
Numbers  than  in  the  present.  It  is  of  the  peculiar  functions  of  the  sacerdotal 
body  usually  termed  '  the  sons  of  Aaron,'  that  the  book,  for  the  most  part,  treats, 
for  which  reason  it  is  denominated  by  the  Talmudists  Q'^;ri3n  Hlin  torath  hak- 
kohanim,  the  law  of  the  priests,  and  mDlS*lpn  Dllin  torath  hakkorbanoth,  the  law 
of  the  offerings.  The  *  sons  of  Aaron,'  or  the  priests,  were  mtyely  assisted  in 
the  performance  of  their  sacred  office  by  the  descendants  of  the  other  branch  of 
Levi's  family,  who  obtained  the  privilege  of  officiating  as  a  kind  of  second  order 
of  the  priesthood,  in  recompense  of  the  ready  zeal  which  they  displayed  against 
idolatry  and  the  worshippers  of  the  golden  calf. 

That  Moses  was  the  real  author  of  this  book,  is  proved,  not  only  by  the  gen. 
eral  arguments  which  demonstrate  him  to  have  written  the  whole  Pentateuch, 
but  by  particular  passages  in  other  portions  of  the  Scriptures  where  it  is  expressly 
cited  as  his  inspired  work.  Thus,  Nehem.  8.  14, '  And  they  found  written  in  the 
law  which  the  Lord  had  commanded  61/  Moses,  that  the  children  of  Israel  should 
dwell  in  booths  in  the  feast  of  the  seventh  month.'  This  ordinance  is  contained 
Lev.  23.  34,  42.  Again  it  is  said  of  the  mother  of  Jesus,  Luke  2.  22,  that '  When 
the  days  of  her  purification  according  to  the  law  of  Moses,  were  accomplished, 
Ihey  brought  him  to  Jerusalem,'  a  law  which  is  to  be  found  Lev.  12.  6.  Once 
more,  it  is  said  2  Chron.  30.  16,  of  the  priests  and  Levites,  that  '  they  stood  in 
their  place,  after  their  manner,  according  to  the  law  of  Moses,  the  man  of  the 
Lord  ;  the  priests  sprinkled  of  the  blood  which  they  received  of  the  hand  of  the 
Levites.'  This  regulation  occurs  Lev.  1. 5.  The  true  authorship  of  the  book  is 
by  these  passages  put  beyond  question. 

The  time  and  place  at  which  the  book  was  written,  are  determined  by  the 


IV  INTRODUCTION. 

words  occurring  th.  27.  34, '  These  are  the  commandments  which  the  Lord  com. 
manded  Moses  for  the  children  of  Israel  in  Mount  Sinai.'  That  this  is  to  bff 
understood  not  only  of  those  laws  which  were  orally  promulgated  at  that  time 
and  place,  but  of  those  also  which  were  committed  to  writing,  may  be  inferred 
I'rom  the  parallel  expression,  Num.  36.  13,  '  These  are  the  commandments  and 
the  judgments  which  the  Lord  commanded  by  the  hand  of  Moses,  unto  the  child- 
ren of  Israel,  in  the  plains  of  Moab,  by  Jordan,  near  Jericho.'  As  it  was  in  the 
plains  of  Moab  here  mentioned  that  Moses  died,  and  as  the  precepts  in  the  book 
of  Numbers  could  not  have  been  written  either  prior  or  subsequent  to  the  period 
of  the  sojourn  at  that  station,  it  is  reasonable  to  conclude,  that  if  in  one  case 
mention  is  made  o[  written  laws,  the  same  is  to  be  understood  in  the  other.  So 
that  there  is  no  room  to  question  that  this  book  was  written  during  the  encamp- 
ment of  Israel  at  the  foot  of  Mount  Sinai.  This  is  strikingly  confirmed  by  such 
allusions  as  the  following,  indicating  that  the  state  of  the  Israelites  at  the  time, 
was  that  of  an  encampment,  instead  of  a  permanent  settlement  in  cities  and 
villages.  Lev.  4.  12, '  The  whole  bullock  shall  he  carry  forth  without  the  campJ 
V.  28,  '  And  afterward  he  shall  come  into  the  camp.''  Ch.  14.  33,  '  And  the  Lord 
spake  unto  Moses  and  unto  Aaron,  saying.  When  ye  be  come  into  the  land  of 
Canaan  which  I  give  to  you,'  &c.  implying  that  they  had  not  yet  arrived  there. 

§  2.  The  Period  embraced  by  the  History. 
Archbishop  Usher,  who  is  followed  by  Mr.  Home,  supposes  that  the  book 
comprises  the  history  of  the  transactions  of  a  single  month,  viz.  from  April  21 
to  May  21 ,  of  the  year  2514,  which  answers  to  the  first  month  of  the  second  year 
after  the  departure  from  Egypt.  Others  consider  it  as  containing  only  the  ac- 
count of  what  passed  during  the  eight  days  of  the  consecration  of  Aaron  and  his 
sons.  The  former  is  the  more  generally  received  opinion,  but  as  the  book  itself 
contains  no  definite  data  by  which  the  chronological  arrangement  of  its  facta 
can  be  adjusted,  we  can  afiirm  nothing  positive  on  the  subject. 

§  3.  Divisions,  Contents,  ^c. 
By  the  Jews  this  book  is  divided  into  ten  STlTU'lS  parashoth,  or  larger  divisions, 
and  twenty-three  fci^no  siderim,  or  smaller  divisions.    These,  in  the  arrange- 
ment  of  our  Bibles,  are  comprised  in   twenty-seven  chapters,  of  which  the 
contents  may  be  again  subdivided  and  classified  as  follows : 

Part:  I. — Laics  concerning  Sacrifices. 

CHAPTERS 

I.  Oftheburnt-ofierings, 1 

II.  Of  the  meat-ofierings,             2 

III.  Of  the  peace-ofl'erings, 3 

IV.  Of  the  sin-ofi"erings, 4,6 

V   Of  the  trespass-offerings, 6,  7 

Part  11.— Institution  of  the  Priesthood. 

I.  The  consecration  of  Aaron  and  his  sons, fi 

II.  The  offerings  at  the  consecration  of  the  priests,  -        -  D 

III.  Death  of  Nadab  and  Abihu, •        -      10 


I** 

INTRODUCTION.  V 

CHAPTERS 

Part  III. — Distinction  of  Clean  and  Unclean  Animals. 
I.  Unclean  beasts,  birds,  fishes,  &c.  specified,  ....  n 

Part  IV. — Laws  concerning  Purification. 

I.  Of  women  after  child-birth, 12 

II.  Of  persons  infected  with  leprosy, 13,14 

III.  Of  persons  having  bad  issues, 15 

Part  V. — Various  Regulations. 

I.  Concerning  the  great  day  of  atonement,  16 

II.        "  the  place  of  offering  sacrifices,  -        .♦      .        -  17 

III.  "  things  prohibited  to  be  eaten, 17 

IV.  "  incestuous  connexions, 18 

V.        "  idolatry  and  various  other  crimes,  •        -        •         19-22 

Part  VI. — Laws  concerning  the  Festivals,  Vows,  and  Tithes. 
I.  The  sabbath,  passover,  pentecost,  feast  of  trumpets,  day  of  atone- 
ment, and  feast  of  tabernacles,  23 

II.  Various  ceremonial  and  judicial  rites  relative  to  sacred  festivals,  24 

III.  Law  of  the  sabbatic  year,  year  of  jubilee,  &c.  ....  25 

IV.  Prohibition  of  idolatry,  &c.  26 

V.  Of  vows,  things  devoted,  and  tithes, 27 

§  4.  Argument,  Scope,  SfC. 

Although  the  book  of  Leviticus  contains  some  matters  purely  historical,  j'et 
its  leading  scope  is  to  record  the  laws  concerning  the  sacrifices,  ordinances,  and 
instilulions  of  that  remarkable  economy  from  which  it  derives  its  name.  The 
established  worship  of  the  Hebrews  was  oflTering — not  prayer,  said  or  chanted, 
nor  instrumental  music,  nor  any  like  form  of  devotion — but  the  presenting  to  the 
Deity  certain  articles  of  food  and  drink.  This  system  of  worship  is  not  to  be 
understood  as  having  originated  at  tlie  time  to  which  the  book  refers.  As  there 
were  moral  laws  in  the  world  by  which  human  conduct  was  more  or  less  governed 
prior  to  the  delivery  of  the  Decalogue  from  Mount  Sinai,  so  it  is  evident  from 
the  history  of  Cain  and  Abel,  of  Noah,  of  Abraham,  and  other  patriarchs,  that 
sacrificial  offerings  are  to  be  dated  back  to  the  earliest  periods  of  wliich  we  have 
any  account.  They  constituted  the  prevailing  form  in  which  the  spirit  of  devn- 
tion  was  taught  to  express  itself  from  the  very  infancy  of  the  race.  But  as  sac- 
rifices were  ordained  to  enter  largely  into  the  dispensation  now  about  to  be  estab- 
lished, they  are  in  this  book  instituted,  as  it  were,  anew,  placed  upon  their  true 
foundation,  and  commanded  with  circtmistances  which  gave  them  greater  im- 
portance, and  served  to  illustrate  their  typical  character  with  more  effect. 

The  sacrifices  prescribed  in  the  Levitical  worship,  were  of  two  kinds;  the 
bloody  and  the  u?ibloody  ;  or  the  animal  and  the  vegetable  offerings  ;  the  latter 
consisting  o( fruits  and  libations. 

(I.)  The  Bloodv  Sacrifices. — These  consisted,  (1.)  of  Holocausts,  which 
were  oflTered  to  the  Lord  entire,  and  were  considered  as  ranking  highest  in  dig. 
1* 


VI  INTRODUCTION. 

nity  and  excellence,  for  which  reason  Moses  commences  the  law  of  sacrifices  with 
them.  (2.)  Sin  and  Trespass-offerings,  distinguished  from  the  holocausts  by 
certain  parts  only  of  the  animal  being  burnt  on  the  altar,  while  the  flesh  was 
eaten  by  the  priests.  (3.)  Eucharistical  Sacrifices,  or  Thank-offerings.  In 
these  the  fat  only  was  consumed  on  the  altar,  a  small  portion  being  allotted  by 
law  to  the  priest,  and  all  the  rest  being  eaten  at  a  solemn  and  joyful  feast  by  the 
offerer  and  his  guests. 

(II.)  Unbloody  Sacrifices,  or  Meat-offerings. — These  consisted  of  flour, 
bread,  cakes,  and  ears  of  corn  and  grain  roasted,  of  which  a  full  account  is  given 
in  ch.  2.  The  libations  were  of  wine,  and  although  the  mode  of  pouring  them 
out  is  nowhere  described,  yet  it  is  most  likely  that  the  wine  was  poured  out  of 
some  vessel  upon  the  top  of  the  altar. 

That  these  sacrifices  had  all  of  them  a  typical  intent  ;  that  they  were  '  sha- 
dows of  good  things  to  come,'  pointing  more  or  less  distinctly  to  <  the  body  which 
is  of  Christ,'  the  whole  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  a  continued  proof.  The  impo- 
sition  of  hands  upon  the  head  of  the  victim,  the  shedding  of  its  blood,  and  the 
consumption  of  its  members  upon  the  altar,  were  prefiguralive  acts  setting  forth, 
by  a  kind  of  dramatic  representation,  the  future  offering  of  the  '  Lamb  of  God 
slain  from  the  foundation  of  the  world.'  The  requisite  qualities  of  these  sacri- 
ficial victims  were  emblematical  of  Christ's  immaculate  character,  and  the  law 
of  their  oblation  was  a  practical  hieroglyphic  of  the  great  gospel  truth  of  the 
atonement.  So  also  were  the  outward  washings  and  purifications  enjoined  by  the 
Mosaic  law,  designed  to  intimate  the  necessity  of  inward  purity.  Indeed,  if 
these  institutions  be  severed  from  their  New  Testament  relations,  we  have  no 
key  to  unlock  the  hidden  meaning  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  the  whole  ritual  con- 
tained in  it  dwindles  down  to  a  burdensome  round  of  unmeaning  ceremonies. 
But  when  regarded  in  the  light  now  suggested,  the  whole  service,  like  the  veil 
on  the  face  of  Moses,  conceals  a  spiritual  radiance  under  an  outward  covering, 
and  the  wisdom  of  the  various  appointments  appears  at  once  worthy  of  its  di- 
vine Author.  To  what  extent  the  spiritual  import  of  these  riles  was  actually 
understood  by  the  Jews  themselves,  it  may  not  be  easy  to  determine  ;  but  iliat 
something,  over  and  above  the  simple  act  of  slaying  and  offering  the  animal 
victim,  was  required  by  the  spirit  of  the  law  is  evident  from  the  fact,  that  the 
obedience  of  the  chosen  people  is  frequently  represented  as  faulty,  notwith- 
standing their  scrupulous  observance  of  the  outward  rile.  Tl)us  Isai.  ].  11,  12, 
'  To  what  purpose  is  the  multitude  of  your  sacrifices  unto  me?  saith  the  Lord  : 
I  am  full  of  the  burnt-offerings  of  rams,  and  the  fat  of  fed  beasts  ;  and  I  delight 
not  in  the  blood  of  bullocks,  or  of  lambs,  or  of  he  goats.' 

But  while  the  Jews  probably  in  great  measure  fell  short  of  apprehending  the 
true  typical  genius  of  their  own  dispensation,  and  consequently  rejected  iis 
divine  Fulfiller  when  he  came,  an  error  is  often  committed  on  the  other  hand,  in 
modern  times,  by  the  attempt  to  elicit  more  from  ihese  figurative  institutions 
than  they  were  intended  to  convey.  It  by  no  means  follows  that  becsiuse  cer- 
tain portions  of  the  Levilical  economy  have  a  typical  purport,  we  have  therefore 
a  right  to  gwe  loose  to  imagination  and  multiply  types  at  will,  as  if  llie  Scrip- 
lures  meant  all  that  they  can  be  made  to  mean.  This  was  the  fault  of  many  of 
the  earlier  interpreters,  who  so  abounded  in  mystical  senses  as  to  convert  nearly 
the  whole  system  into  a  mass  of  fancied  allegories  and  typical  allusions,  which 


INTRODUCTION.  ^ 

Luther  very  properly  characterized  as  the  'froth  of  scripture.'  To  such  lengths 
was  this  style  of  interpretation  carried  by  Origen,  Hesychius,  and  their  disciples 
in  later  times,  that  one  can  scarcely  open  a  volume  of  their  commentaries  with* 
out  reading  in  the  title-page  that  the  '  mystical  sense  is  duly  expounded  ;'  evi- 
deiitly  implying  that  the  duly  of  the  commentator  was  by  no  means  discharged 
by  the  accurate  grammatical  exegesis  of  the  text ;  but  that  he  was  bound  in 
addition  to  penetrate  beyond  the  surface  of  the  letter,  and  enlighten  his  readers 
by  an  exhibition  of  the  manifold  occult  meanings  hidden  beneath  the  surface,  and 
constituting  those  abysmal  depths  of  import,  which  the  plummet  of  lexicogra- 
phy could  never  presume  to  sound. 

It  may  be  difficult,  indeed,  to  lay  down  precise  rules  which  shall  be  universally 
applicable  in  the  way  of  interpretation,  but  the  grand  canon  undoubtedly  is,  to 
fallow  strictly  the  apostolical  explanations,  where  we  have  them  j  and,  where 
we  have  them  not,  to  proceed  with  extreme  caution,  adhering  rigidly  to  the 
analogy  of  faitb,  and  standing  as  remote  as  possible  from  any  thing  which  may 
appear  fanciful,  and  give  occasion  to  cavillers  to  discard  typical  expositions 
uitogeiher.  Under  these  restrictions  we  may  safely  recognize  a  typical  import 
in  many  items  of  the  Levitical  law  which  are  not  expressly  affirmed  by  the  New 
Testament  writers  to  be  possessed  of  that  character;  and,  in  fact,  in  no  other 
way  will  that  wondrous  polity  disclose  to  us  the  whole  richness  of  its  evangeli- 
cal implications. 

§  5.  Commentators. 

The  remark  made  under  this  head  in  the  introduction  to  the  Notes  on  Exo- 
dus, holds  strictly  true  of  the  book  of  Leviticus,  viz.  that  it  has  been  the  subject 
of  few  commentaries  except  such  as  have  at  the  same  time  embraced  either  the 
whole  Pentateuch  or  the  whole  Bible.  In  pointing  out  therefore  the  sources  of 
illustration  for  this  portion  of  the  Mosaic  writings,  I  can  do  little  more  than 
recite  the  authorities  already  specified  in  my  preceding  volumes.  They  will  be 
found  enumerated  at  considerable  length  in  the  prolegomena  to  the  work  oa 
Exodus,  with  critical  estimates  of  the  character  and  value  of  each.  These  it 
will  be  unnecessary  to  repeat  at  length  in  the  present  connexion,  but  it  may  sub- 
serve  the  convenience  and  information  of  the  reader,  to  be  furnished  with  the 
titles  of  those  works,  from  which  he  may  hope  to  derive  the  most  essential  aid 
in  the  study  of  the  scope  and  genius  of  the  Levitical  law.  The  following  may 
be  cited  as  claiming  perhaps  the  first  place  in  this  relation  : — 


Outram's  Dissertations  oa  the  Jewish  Sacri-     Saurin's  Dissertations. 

fices.  I  Michaelis'  Comment,  on  Laws  of  Moses* 

Lowman  on  the  Hebrew  Ritual, 
J.  P.  Smith  on  the  Sacrifice  and   Priesthood 

of  Christ. 
Faber  on  the  Three  Dispensation*. 

"     Hora2  Mosaics. 
Willett's  Hesapla  on  Leviticus. 
Pictorial  Bible. 
Lightfoot's  Works. 
Magee  on  the  Atonement. 


Spencer  de  Legibus  Hebrffiorum. 

Graves  on  the  Pentateuch. 

Warburton's  Divine  Legation. 

Davison  on  Sacrifices. 

Sykes  on  do. 

Bahr's  Symbolik   of  the    Mosaic  Worship 

(Germ.) 
Owen'fl  Prelim.  Dissert,  on  Epistle  to  the 

Hebrews. 


Witsius'  Miscellaoea  Sacra.  I  Aintworlh  on  the  Pentateuch. 


Vm  INTRODUCTION. 

•  To  most  of  the  above  works  I  have  had  recourse  in  the  preparation  of  the  en- 
suing Notes,  but  to  one  of  the  number — The  Pictorial  Bible — I  feel  constrained 
on  this,  as  on  former  occasions,  to  express  my  indebtedness  in  a  more  particular 
manner.  The  Notes  of  the  Editor,  Mr.  Kitto,  can  scarcely  be  consulted  on  any 
point  of  which  he  treats  without  advantage,  but  it  is  more  especially  in  the 
department  of  modern  oriental  manners  and  usages,  that  his  work  is  so  signally 
in  advance  of  any  other  Biblical  Commentary.  From  having  himself  spent  sev- 
eral years  as  a  traveler  in  the  East,  he  has  been  enabled  to  make  the  existing 
institutions,  laws,  and  customs  of  those  ancient  regions  of  the  globe  most  happily 
tributary  to  the  explanation  of  a  multitude  of  passages  which  had  never  before  the 
light  of  a  satisfactory  solution  cast  upon  them.  On  all  subjects  of  this  nature, 
it  will  be  perceived  that  I  have  drawn  largely  upon  his  pages,  and  so  also 
in  the  natural  history  of  the  beasts,  birds,  and  fishes  mentioned  in  the 
eleventh  chapter,  in  laying  down  the  distinction  between  the  clean  and  the  un- 
clean. For  a  very  large  part  of  the  annotations  on  that  chapter,  requiring  a 
species  of  knowledge  to  which  a  mere  critical  or  practical  expositor  can  seldom 
be  expected  to  lay  claim,  I  have  been  indebted  to  the  results  of  his  accurate 
inquiries.  Being  conscious  of  the  necessity,  in  this  province  of  my  work,  of 
'  entering  into  other  men's  labors,'  I  trust  the  reader,  instead  of  objecting  to  my 
copious  extracts,  will  rather  be  grateful  that  I  have  provided  so  liberally  from 
this  source  for  his  information  in  a  field  of  comment,  into  which  he  has  probably 
often  come  '  seeking  fruit,  and  finding  none.' 

In  reference  to  the  work  now  offered  as  a  new  korban  on  the  altar  of  Biblical 
learning,  a  few  words  will  be  permitted.  The  book  which  I  have  here  under- 
taken to  illustrate  on  the  plan  of  my  previous  volumes,  constitutes  a  part  of  the 
sacred  canon  less  read,  and  usually  accounted  less  interesting  and  important, 
than  almost  any  other.  Although  not  omitted,  of  course,  in  any  regular  reading 
of  the  Scriptures  entire  from  beginning  to  end,  yet  it  is  seldom  relumed  to  on 
any  other  occasion  ;  and  in  Bible-c4ass  and  Sunday-school  instruction  is  almost 
invariably  passed  by.  May  I  be  allowed  to  express  the  hope,  that  the  present 
volume  will  be  found,  in  no  small  measure,  to  have  redeemed  this  book  from  the 
comparative  disparagement  which  has  fallen  upon  it  ?  If  the  ensuing  notes 
shall  have  the  effect  of  transferring  to  the  reader,  in  any  good  degree,  the  feel- 
ing of  intense  interest  which  has  pervaded  the  mind  of  the  author  in  the  prose- 
cution of  his  labors,  the  book  will  rise  in  his  estimation  with  the  perusal  of  every 
successive  chapter,  till  at  the  close  he  shall  acknowledge  that  revelation  is  rich 
even  in  its  poorest  parts,  and  that  without  the  accurate  knowledge  of  the  Law 
which  he  here  acquires,  he  never  could  so  fully  have  understood  the  nature  and 
value  of  the  Gospel. 

No  apology  will  be  required  by  the  thorough  student  of  the  Bible  for  the  very 
frequent  citation  of  the  original  in  its  appropriate  type.  The  sentences  are 
always  translated,  and  I  doubt  not  they  will  in  many  instances  verify  to  the 
reader's  mind  the  remark,  which  has  so  often  occurred  to  my  own,  that  a  strictly 
literal  rendering  of  a  passage  of  Scripture  is,  in  multitudes  of  cases,  the  very 
best  commentary  that  can  be  offered  upon  it.  The  Hebrew  is  given  without 
points,  not  from  any  slight  esteem  of  the  value  of  that  appendage  to  the  language, 
but  simply  in  order  to  preserve  the  symmetry  of  the  page  by  preventing  the 
lines  from  being  thrown  unduly  asunder. 


THE  BOOK  OF  LEVITICUS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THK   BURNT-OFFERING. 

In  the  system  of  Jewish  sacrifices, 
the  Burnt-ofFerings,  treated  of  in  this 
chapter,  held  the  most  conspicuous 
place.  They  were  of  all  others  the 
most  ancient ;  as  the  acceptable  offer- 
ing of  Abel  was  undoubtedly  of  this 
description,  and  the  worship  both  of 
Noah  and  Abraham,  long  prior  to  the 
time  of  Moses,  included  them  as  an 
essential  element.  Indeed,  the  direc- 
tions concerning  offerings  in  the  chapter 
before  us,  are  introduced  in  such  a  way 
as  to  indicate  that  the  Lawgiver  was 
not  propounding  anew  form  of  worship, 
but  regulating  the  ritual  of  one  already 
understood  and  used  :  '  When  any  man 
of  you  shall  bring  an  offering  to  the 
Lord,  ye  shall  bring  your  offering  of  the 
cattle,  even  of  the  herd  and  of  tlie  flock.' 
The  earliest  records  of  heathen  anti- 
quity  show,  moreover,  that  such  sacri- 
fices were  in  use  among  nearly  all 
nations,  and  distinguished  by  accompa- 
nying rites  and  ceremonies  very  similar 
to  those  observed  by  the  Hebrews, 
clearly  indicating  that  they  derived 
thoir  origin  from  the  same  source,  to  wit, 
a  divine  institution  ordained  to  the  pa- 
rents of  the  race,  and  kept  up  among 
the  antediluvians,  from  whom,  through 
Noah  and  his  family,  it  was  transmitted 
to  all  subsequent  generations  of  men, 
wherever  dispersed  over  the  earth. 

The  original  term  for  burnt-offering, 
n^3J  oldh.  comes  from  the  root,  \i^^ 
dhlh,  to  ascend.  It  is  so  called,  be- 
cause it  was  laid  whole  on  the  altar, 
and  then,  with  the  exception  of  the  skin, 
being  consumed  by  fire,  the  greatest  part 


of  it  ascended  towards  heaven.  Its 
equivalents  in  other  languages  are  as 
follows;  Chal.  Hints'  alia,  ascension; 
'^"'^'J  kelil,entireness  ;  JS;'^"i723  gemira, 
oblation.  Gr.  oXoK-aorrc  or.5,  KaprrM^a,  6,\  - 
K-aurw/xi,  all  conveying  the  idea  of  a 
fire-offering  wholly  consumed,  which 
is  also  clearly  intimated  by  the  Latin 
word  '  holocaustum,'  holocaust.  The 
sacrifice  consisted  in  the  immolating  of 
a  male  animal  victim,  which  was  some- 
times a  bull  of  three  years  old,  some- 
times a  sheep  or  goat  of  one  year  old, 
and  sometimes,  but  more  rarely,  a  tur- 
tle-dove, or  young  pigeon.  But  from 
whatever  class  of  the  animal  kingdom 
it  were  taken,  whether  from  the  herd  or 
the  flock,  whether  it  were  bullock,  ram, 
or  goat,  one  thing  was  indispensable — 
it  was  to  be  perfect  in  its  kind,  '  a  male 
without  blemish.'  This  rule  was  given 
to  intimate  to  the  people  the  reverence 
and  respect  with  which  they  should 
regard  God,  and  every  part  of  his  ser- 
vice. It  would  be  highly  unbecoming 
to  offer  to  liim  any  thing  that  was  lame, 
or  blind,  or  diseased,  or  in  any  other 
way  of  little  value.  He  will  be  served 
with  every  creature's  best.  But  this 
i  was  not  all.  The  animal  was  to  be  the 
I  most  excellent  of  its  kind,  in  order  the 
I  more  fitly  to  shadow  forth  the  excellen- 
cies of  Him  who  was  to  be  the  great 
substance  of  this  type,  the  Lamb  slain 
from  the  foundation  of  the  world,  and 
who  alone  of  all  that  ever  partook  of 
our  nature  was  truly  without  sin.  As 
he  was  to  be  a  spotless  Savior,  so  his 
representing  type  was  to  be  a  spotless 
victim.  In  addition  to  this  it  is  to  be 
observed,  that  the  animal  was  to  be  se- 
lected from  among  those  that  were  used 
for  food,  and  were  most  eminently  ser- 


10 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


viceable  to  man  ;  thus  teaching  him,  | 
that  in  serving  God  we  are  not  to  with- 
hold from  him  even  that  which  is  most 
near  and  dear  to  us,  which  goes  to  sus- 
tain our  being  and  constitute  our  com- 
forts. As  we  received  all  from  him,  so 
we  must  render  back  all  to  him.  Nor 
must  we  here  fail  to  notice  that  peculiar 
feature  of  the  law,  by  which  the  obla- 
tion was  to  be  varied  according  to  the 
ability  of  the  offerer.  While  the  rich 
man  presented  his  bullock,  the  consider- 
ate and  benignant  spirit  of  the  law  made 
provision  for  the  poor  man  also,  who, 
as  his  circumstances  would  permit, 
might  bring  a  lamb  or  a  pigeon,  with 
the  assurance  of  its  being  equally  ac- 
ceptable with  the  costlier  gift  of  his 
neighbor.  No  one  was  to  be  discouraged 
from  approaching  God,  by  the  consider- 
ation that  he  was  not  able  to  present  to 
him  such  an  offering  as  he  could  wish. 
He  would  have  no  man,  however  hum- 
ble, excluded  from  the  pleasures  and 
benefits,  to  say  nolliing  of  the  duties,  of 
such  a  religious  observance.  So  legihly 
do  we  find  the  stamp  of  the  divine  bene- 
ficence impressed  upon  the  smallest 
items  of  liis  institutions. 

The  various  ceremonies  connected 
with  the  rile  of  the  Burnt-offering,  will 
be  considered  in  detail,  as  we  proceed 
in  our  annotations  ;  but  we  observe 
here,  in  regard  to  the  occasions  on  which 
this  species  of  offering  was  made,  that 
they  were  both  public  and  private.  As 
their  design  was,  in  the  mdi'm,  expiatory, 
they  were  presented,  partly,  in  the  name 
of  the  whole  nation,  daily,  every  morn- 
ing and  evening,  as  also  in  connexion 
with  a  sin-offering  on  the  great  day  of 
atonement,  and  on  the  three  principal 
anniversary  festivals  ; — partly,  on  the 
solemnity  of  consecration  to  office — and 
partly  by  private  persons,  in  order  to 
be  freed  irom  the  condition  of  Levitical 
uncleanness;  namely,  by  women  after 
child-bearing,  at  the  end  of  the  legally 
prescribed  period  for  the  purification, — 
by  lepers  when  cured, — by  Nazariles, 


when  they  had  touched  a  dead  body,— 
and  by  those  referred  to  in  Lev.  15. 
1-15. 

We  say  that   the  design    of  thes*! 
offerings  was  mainly  expiatory;   and 
such   was   undoubtedly  the   case.      At 
the  same  time,  it  is  to  be  observed,  that 
in  the  early  ages  of  the  world,  when  no 
other  sacrifices  were  offered  but  whole 
burnt-offerings,  this  one  kind  of  sacri- 
fice  was  also  petitionary  and  euchU' 
ristic.  and  was  in  fact  applied  to  every 
part  of  sacred  worship,  according  to  the 
circumstances  and  promptings  of  each 
individual.    This  is  clearly  deducible 
from  the  inspired  history.    Noah  offered 
burnt-offerings  as  an  expression  of  gra. 
titude  to  God  for  the  preservation  of 
himself   and  his    family  through   tlie 
perils  of  the  deluge.    Job  added  burnt- 
I  offerings  to  prayers,  when  he  interceded 
I  for   forgiveness   for  liis    sons  and    his 
I  friends.      Balaam,    following,    beyond 
■  doubt,   the    general    custom,   directed 
;  burnt-offerings  to  be  prepared  when  he 
was  about  to  pray  for  safety  to  Balak, 
and  destruction  to  the  Israelites.    That 
bumf  offerings  used  also  to  be  presented 
as  votive  and  voluntary  oblations,  may 
be  inferred  from  the  language  of  David, 
Ps.   63.   13-15,   '  I   will   go  into  thine 
house  with  burnt-offerings  ;  I  will  pay 
thee   my  vows,    which  my  lips  have 
uttered,  and   my  mouth  hath  spoken, 
when  I  was  in  trouble.     I  will  offer  unto 
tl-.ee  burnt-sacrifices  of  fallings,  with 
the  incense  of  rams  ;  I  will  offer  bul- 
locks with  goats.'  Ps.  61.  IS,  19.    '  Do 
good  in  thy  good  pleasure  unto  Zion ; 
build    thou   the    Vv'alls    of   Jerusalem. 
Then   shalt  thou  be  pleased  with   the 
sacrifices  of  righteousness,  with  burnt- 
offerings  and    tchole   burnt-offerings ; 
then    shall    they  offer  bullocks   upon 
thine  aliar.'     In   the  former  of  these 
passages  is  doubtless  to  be  understood 
votive   offerings  ;    and    in  the     latter, 
voluntary  ones. 

And  it  is  voluntary  offerings,  unques- 
tionably,  w  hich  are  contemplated  in  the 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  I. 


11 


A 


CHAPTER  I. 
ND  the  Lorda  called  unto  Mo- 
ses, and  spake  unto  himb  out 

"  Ex.  19,  3. 


of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congrega- 
tion, saying, 

b  Ex.  40,  34,  35.  Num.  12,  4,  5, 


chapter  before  us.  The  burnt-ofFerins 
about  which  directions  are  here  given 
was  not  the  public  offering  of  the  lamb,  I 
morning  and  evening,  nor  one  pre- 
scribed to  the  Israelites  at  any  appoint- 
ed time,  or  upon  any  particular  occa- 
sion. It  had  respect  to  an  offering  to 
be  brought  by  any  individual,  whenever 
he  felt  himself  so  disposed.  It  was 
ordered  in  view  of  those  seasons  in  the 
pious  Israelite's  experience,  when  he 
felt  his  mind  under  more  than  ordinary 
impressions  ;  when  he  was  sensible  of 
his  general  sinfulness  and  deficiencies  ; 
and  when  he  would  humbly  seek  mercy 
for  those  manifold  offences  and  failings 
which  are  not  particularly  specified, 
and  had  no  express  offering  appointed 
for  them. 

As  to  the  leading  typical  design  of 
the  Burnt-offering,  nothing  can  be  clear- 
er than  that  it  had  a  special  regard  to 
the  offering  of  Christ  in  a  human  body. 
It  is  so  stated  in  the  epistle  to  the  He- 
brews ;  *  When  he  cometh  into  the 
world  he  saith, sacrifice  and  offering  thou 
wouldst  not,  but  a  body  hast  thou  pre- 
pared me  ;  in  burnt-offerings  and  sacri- 
fices for  sin  thou  hast  no  pleasure.  Then 
said  I,  Lo,  I  come  (in  the  volume  of 
the  bocU  it  is  written  of  me),  to  do  thy 
will,  O  God.'  Here  were  the  sins  of  a 
whole  world  to  be  atoned  for  ;  here 
were  innumerable  transgressions  of  in- 
numerable persons,  which  needed  mer- 
cy. The  time  was  come  when  the 
„'aitle  upon  a  thousand  hills  would  be 
no  longer  accepted,  but  the  offering  of 
the  Son  of  God  was  to  supersede  them 
all.  He  was  to  be  slain,  who  alone 
could  present  an  oblation  worthy  to  be 
accepted  as  an  expiation  for  the  sins  of 
untold  millions  of  human  beings.  Such 
an  offering  he  did  present  in  the  sacri- 
fice of  himself  on  the  cross,  and  the 


intensity  of  his  sufferings  in  undergoing 
that  vicarious  martyrdom  is  not  inaptly 
denoted  by  the  burning  of  the  whole 
Burnt-offering  which  was  so  expressly 
enjoined.  But  without  appearing  to 
press  the  coincidences  between  the 
type  and  the  antitype,  when  every  thing 
is  taken  into  consideration,  we  see  not 
how  a  doubt  can  remain  that  the  sacri- 
fice of  the  Burnt-offering  was  designed 
as  a  piacular  substitute  for  the  indivi- 
dual  in  whose  behalf  it  was  brought  to 
the  altar.  With  these  remarks  we  are 
prepared  to  enter  upon  the  explication 
of  the  text. 

1.  And  the  Lord  called  unto  Moses f 
and  spake  unto  him,  4'^.  Heb.  S^lp"^! 
vayikra,  and  he  called.  The  word 
'  Lord,'  though  inserted  by  our  transla- 
tors in  the  first  clause,  occurs  in  the 
original  only  in  the  second  ; — '  And  he 
called  unto  Moses,  and  the  Lord  said,' 
&c.  A  similar  construction  occurs  in 
Lev.  8.  15:  '  And  he  slew  it,  and 
Moses  took  the  blood,'  &c. — where  it 
would  seem,  from  the  context,  that  it 
was  Moses  who  slew  the  sacrifice. 
Still  the  note  on  that  passage  will  show 
that  there  is  some  degree  of  doubt  as  to 
the  true  construction.  The  Jerus. 
Targ.  in  this  place  renders,  '  And  the 
Word  of  the  Lord  called,'  &c.  As  the 
cloud  of  glory  now  filled  the  tabernacle, 
and  prevented  all  access  to  its  interior, 
Moses  stood  without  while  an  audible 
voice  from  the  mercy-seat  addressed 
him  in  the  words  immediately  follow- 
ing.  The  word  '  called,'  in  the  original, 
has  the  last  letter  written  in  smaller 
character  than  the  rest,  intimating,  ac- 
cording  to  the  Jews,  that  God  now  spake, 
not  with  a  loud  thundering  voice,  as 
upon  Mount  Sinai,  but  in  lower  and 
gentler  tones,  as  befitted  a  milder  and 
more  permanent  mode  of  communica* 


12 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490 


2  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  them,c  If  any 
man  of  you  bring  an  offering  unto 

c  ch.  '2-2,  13,  19. 

tion. IF  Out  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 

congregation.  Heb.  1^1'?2  ^inii^  m'co- 
hel  mo'td,  more  correctly  rendered  ta- 
bernacle of  meeting,  or  convention-tent, 
i.  e.,  the  tent  or  tabernacle  where  God 
and  his  people  met  at  stated  times. 
See  Note  on  Ex.  27.  21,  where  it  is 
shown  that  the  term  implies  the  meet- 
ing of  two  parties  by  previous  appoint- 
ment. Gr,  £K  r>7f  aKrjvrii  tov  fiapTVpiov^ 
from  the  tabernacle  of  the  testimony. 
Compare  Num.  11.  53,  Acts  7.  14. 
By  the  phrase  '  out  of  the  tabernacle,'  is 
meant,  out  of  the  most  holy  place,  from 
over  the  mercy-seat,  and  between  the 
cherubim,  Avhere  God  was  said  pecu- 
liarly to  reside.  Hitherto  he  had  spoken 
to  Moses  out  of  heaven,  or  out  of  the 
cloud ;  but  having  taken  possession  of 
the  temple  prepared  for  him,  he  makes 
that  his  audience-chamber,  and  gives 
his  servant  orders  from  thence.  It 
does  not  appear  that  Moses  was  com- 
manded to  come  into  the  tabernacle, 
as  the  precluding  glory  probably  now 
filled  the  sacred  edifice,  but  we  may 
suppose  that  he  stood  without,  at  or 
near  the  entrance,  and  there  reverently 
listened  to  the  uttered  voice  of  Jehovah. 
2.  If  any  man  of  you  bring  an  offer- 
ing. Heb.  inip  Cr?2  ^^^p-^  ^3  CTJ^ 
adam  ki  yakrib  mikkem  korban,  a  man 
vhen  he  shall  bring  of  you  an  offering. 
The  original  word  here  and  elsev.'here 
rendered  '  offering,'  is  p^p  korban,  de- 
rived  from  the  verb  i^p  karab,  signify- 
ing radically  to  approach,  to  draw  near 
to,  and  in  what  is  termed  the  Hiphil,  or 
causative  form,  to  cause  to  approach, 
to  bring  near,  to  present  ;  hence  in  the 
Hiphil,  the  verb  is  generally  rendered 
in  our  version  to  offer,  a  sense  of  the 
term  expressly  confirmed  by  the  fact 
mat  the  original  v/ords  for  «  bring  near,' 
and  '  ofler,'  are  used    iulerohangoably 


the  Lord,  ye  shall  bring  your  of- 
fering of  the  cattle,  even  of  the 
herd,  and  of  the  flock. 


with  each  other  in  the  following  pas- 
sages :—l  Chron.  16.  1,  'And  they 
offered  (IH'^^p'i  yakribu,)  burnt-sacri- 
;  fices  and  peace-offerings  before  God  ;' 
j  for  which  2  Sam.  6.  17  has,  '  And  David 
offered  C^'S'^  yaal,)  burnt-offerings  and 
peace-offerings  before  the  Lord.'  In 
accordance  with  this,  the  noun  p^p 
korban,  Gr.  6cjpov  gift,  is  used  to  denote 
'  an  oflTering,'  or  that  wliich  wasbrought 
to  the  altar,  and  dedicated  to  God,  whe- 
ther it  was  a  thing  animate  or  inani- 
mate, a  human  being  or  a  brute  beast. 
(On  the  use  of  the  word  in  the  New 
Testament,  Mark  7.  11,  in  reference  to 
a  practice  condemned  by  our  Savior, 
see  Barnes'  note,  in  loc.)  Thus  the 
bread  or  meat-offering,  and  the  oblation 
of  the  first  fruits,  Lev.  2.  1-12,  have  tlie 
appellation  '  korban  '  given  them  :  'And 
when  any  man  will  oflier  a  meat-ofler- 
ing  (meal-offering,)  unto  the  Lord,  his 
offering  (korban,)  shall  be  of  fine  fiour,' 
&c.  So  also  the  silver  vessels,  cattle, 
sheep,  StCjoflTered  by  the  princes.  Num. 
7.  10-17,  et  inf.  are  comprehended  under 
the  general  name  of  '  korban.'  Nay, 
the  very  wood  which  was  used  to  burn 
the  sacrifices  on  the  altar,  Nehem.  10. 
34,  from  its  being  brought  for  that  pur- 
pose, is  denominated  'korban.'  And 
what  is  still  more  worthy  of  notice,  the 
same  phraseology  is  employed  in  refer- 
ence to  the  Levites  as  a  consecrated 
body  of  men,  from  their  being  brought 
near  and  presented  to  the  Lord  for  the 
service  of  the  sanctuary  :  Num.  8.  10 
'  And  thou  shall  bring  (rij^pil  hikrab- 
ta,)  the  Levites  before  the  Lord,'  i.  e. 
Shalt  offer  them  as  holy  persons  dedi- 
cated to  the  service  of  Jehovah.  As 
the  verb  ^^^  kdrab,  however,  in  its 
Hiphil  form,  denotes  jirincipally  the 
bare  act  of  bringing  any  thing  to  a  par- 
ticulnr  place  or  person,  though  rendered 


B.  C.  1490.3 


CHAPTER  I. 


13 


3  If  his  offering  he  a  burnt-sacri- 
fice of  the   herd,  let  him  offer  a 

<1  Exod.  12.   5.     ch.   3.    1,   and  22.   20,  21. 


by  the  word  ^  offer/  it  is  to  be  observed, 
that  when  any  private  individual  is  said 
to  '  offer  '  an  animal  or  other  oblation, 
it  is  to  be  understood  simply  of"  his 
bringing  it  to  the  altar,  not  of  his  per- 
forming any  part  of  the  offtce  which 
was    exclusively    appropriated    to    the 

Priests  and  Levites TT  Ye  shall  bring 

your  offering  of  the  cattle,  (even)  of  the 
herd  and  of  the  flock.  Tlie  term  '  cattle ' 
here  is  generic,  including  the  'herd' 
and  the  '  flock '  mentioned  in  connec- 
tion. The  word  'even'  is  therefore 
properly  supplied  in  our  version,  to  in- 
dicate that  '  herd'  and  '  flock'  are  ex- 
egetical  of  '  cattle.'  The  Heb.  term 
•1542  tzon,  comprehends  both  sheep  and 
goats,  as  is  evident  from  v,  10.  It  ap- 
pears, therefore,  that  there  were  only 
five  kinds  of  living  creatures  which  were 
accepted  in  sacrifice,  viz.  of  animals  : 
beeves,  sheep,  and  goats,  including  the 
young  of  each  kind  of  eight  days  old. 
Lev.  22.  27  ;  and  of  fowls:  turtle-doves 
and  young  pigeons,  1.  44.  These  being 
of  the  most  tame,  gentle,  and  harmless 
species  of  creatures,  the  most  easily  ob- 
tained, as  well  as  the  most  serviceable 
to  man,  were  well  adapted  at  once  to 
point  out  the  distinguishing  moral  attri- 
butes of  Christ  and  his  people,  those 
'living  sacrifices'  which  were  '  accept- 
able to  God,'  and  also  to  intimate  man's 
absolute  depcndance  upon  God  for  those 
blessings  to  which  he  owes  his  food  and 
raiment,  the  crowning  comforts  of  life. 
Besides,  as  some  of  the  sacrifices  were 
followed  by  a  feast  on  the  victim,  which 
was  esteemed  a  covenant  rite,  therefore 
such  animals  as  were  allowed  for  food, 
would  naturally  be  required  to  be  offer- 
ed in  sacrifice. 

3.  A  burnt-sacrifice.    Heb.  iTt^V  olah, 
more  correctly  rendered  u-hole  burnt- 
offering.      The    prescribed    sacrificial 
ofierings  are  distinguished  in  Hebrew 
o 


male  '^without  blemish:  he  shall 
offer  it  of  his  own  voluntary  will 

Deut.   15.    21.      Mai.    1.    14.      Eph.  6.   27. 
Heb.  9.  14.     IPet.  1.  19. 


by  two  several  terms,  n'^I^H  isheh,  and 
il"^^  olah,  of  which  the  first  being  a  de- 
rivative from'i'J^  ishjfire,  denotes  an  of- 
fering by  fire,  and  is  applied  both  to  of- 
ferings burnt  wholly, and  to  those  burnt 
in  part.  This  word  is  generally  ren- 
dered by  '  offering  by  fire.'  The  word 
n^5>  olah,  on  the  other  hand,  literally 
signifying  '  ascension,'  from  ni5>  alah, 
to  ascend,  because  these  offerings  went 
up  in  flame  and  smoke  into  the  air,  is 
applied  to  sacrifices  wholly  burnt, 
which  the  Greeks  denominated  oXokov- 
TOifxara  holokautomata,  or  oXoKavGrov  ho- 
lokauston  from  which  the  word  '  holo- 
caust' has  been  transferred  into  our  lan- 
guage. If  rendered  in  English  phrase, 
it  should  properly  be  '  whole  burnt- 
offering,'  whereas  by  its  being  generally 
rendered  by  our  translators  '  burnt-of- 
feritig,'  the  genuine  distinction  between 
the  original  words  is  hidden  from  the 
ordinary  reader,  as  there  is  no  differ- 
ence between  the  expression  '  burnt-of- 
fering,' and  '  offering  by  fire.'  But  let 
the  phrase  '  whole  burnt-offering'  be 
employed,  and  the  distinction  is  ob- 
vious. Every  holocaust  or  '  olah,'  was 
an  '  isheh,'  or  offering  by  fire,  but 
every  'isheh,'  or  fire  offering,  was  not 
a  holocaust.  It  may  liere  be  remarked, 
that  the  '  whole  burnt-offering'  was  the 
first  or  principal  sacrifice  with  which 
God  was  daily  served  by  his  people, 
Num.  28.  3,  no  part  of  it  being  eaten, 
but  the  whole  consumed  upon  tl>e  altar. 
It  pointed  to  the  offering  of  the  body 
of  Christ,  as  is  evident  from  Heb.  10. 
10.  In  Deut.  33,  10,  it  is  rendered 
'  whole  burnt  sacrifice.'  —  IT  A  male 
without  blemish.  Heb.  C'^?2M  tamim, 
perfect ;  i.  e.  having  neither  deformity, 
defect,  nor  superfluity  of  mem'ers,  and 
free  from  distemper.  Wlience  the  pro- 
phet  says,  Mai.  1.14, 'Cursed  be  the 
deceiver  who  hath  in  his  flock  a  male, 


14 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of 
the  congregation  before  the  Lord. 


4  eAnd  he  shall  put  his  hand  up- 

e  ch.  4.  15.  and  3.  2,  8.    13.  and  S.  14,  ii- 


(i.  c.  a  perfect  male,)  and  vowelh  and  ; 
sacrificclh    unto   the   Lord    a  corrupt  I 
thing,'  where  '  corrupt'  is  opposed  to  | 
*  male.'     This  was  a  prefiguration  of  j 
the  perfect  excellence  of  the  sacrifice  I 
of  Christ,  who  was  '  a  lamb  without 
6/emts/i  and  without  spot.'  1  Pet.  1.  19.  | 
And  not  only  so  ;  it  was  doubtless  de-  ' 
signed  to  intimate  that  we  are  to  offer  | 
to    God   the    best  of  all  we  have  ;  the  ' 
best  of  our  time  and  strength,  tlie  vigor  ' 
of  our  days,  and  the  utmost  of  our  ta-  ! 
lents.     Will  he   who   would  have   no- 
thing but  the  best  of  Israel's  herds  and  , 
flocks,  be  pleased  with  such  poor  rem- 
nants of  our  time  and  thoughts  as  may 
be  left  from  the  service  of  the  world  ? 
Had  the  Jew  brought  an  inferior  beast,  ; 
It  would  Irave  been  rejected  by  the  priest,  | 
or  the  ('ffering  would  have  been  void  by 
law.     Let   us  not  suppose  tliat  the  de- 
fectiveness  of    our  spiritual  oblations 
will  be  overlooked  by  liim  who  searches 
the  heart.     What  a  man  soweth,  that  j 
shall  he  rea]).    Niggardly  and  unwilling 
gifts,   weary  and   distasteful   services, 
hasty    and    perturbed    devotions,    will 
find  no  more  acceptance  than  the  Is- 
raelite's blemished  ox. — All  the  Burnt- 
offerings  of  beasts  were  to  be  males, 
but  this  is  not  prescribed  in  regard  to 
the    low  Is.  —  IT  Of  his   own  voluntary 
wit!.    IJeb.  i::r"i^  lirtzono,  to  his  (i.  e. 
God's)    §ood  pleasure,  or  favorable  ac- 
ceptance.    Thus  the  phrase  is  rendered 
by  the  Gr.  u.rov  (.vavn  Kifn-r.  accepta- 
ble before  the   Lord^  and  the  Lat.  '  ad 
placandum   sibi   Doniiiiuiii,'    to  render 
the  Lord  propitious  to  him,  and  thus 
by  i!ie  Chaldee,  '  thai  acceptableness 
m:\\  be  to  hitn  before  the  Lord.'     This 
sensf  is    moreover  confirmed   by  v.  4 
foll.)v.!!ig,  and  by  Lev.  23.  11,  '  And  he 
shall  wave  tl-.e  sheaf  before  the  Lord 
to  be  accepted  for  you,  (D53-Z1^  lirtz- 
onekem),^  and   by    Jer.   6.  20,    '  Your 
turnt-oderings      are      not      acceptable 


(pSii  lerdtzon).'  RosenmuUer  adopts 
the  same  construction.  At  the  same 
time,  the  sense  given  in  our  version 
does  no  positive  violence  to  the  origi- 
nal, and  is  supported  by  respectable 
names,  but  we  think  the  other  deci* 
dedly  preferable. — IT  At  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle.  Because  here  in  the  open 
space  of  the  court  the  altar  of  Burnt- 
offerings  was  placed,  upon  which  alone, 
even  on  pain  of  death,  these  oblations 
were  to  he  made.  Comp.  Lev.  17.  3-7 
The  additional  phrase,  '  before  the 
Lord,'  has  its  usual  import  of  before 
the  Shekinah,  the  visible  symbol  of  the 
divine  presence.  By  thus  bringing  his 
offering  to  the  place  prescribed,  the 
offerer  acknowledged  that  the  Lord 
dwelt  there  in  a  peculiar  manner,  and 
he  moreover  publicly,  before  all  the 
people  acknowledged  himself  a  sinner, 
like  unto  his  brethren,  and  needing  mer- 
cy no  less  than  the  vilest  of  the  human 
race. 

4.  Shall  put  his  hand  upon  the  head, 
<5-r.  From  Lev.  16.  21,  it  is  probable 
that  by  *  hand  '  here  is  implied  both  the 
hands.  The  act  denoted  that  the  vic- 
tim offered  was  thereby  wholly  given 
over  and  devoted  to  God,  being  as  it 
were  henceforth  solemnly  manumitted 
from  the  possession  of  the  offerer,  who 
from  tliis  lime  ceased  to  claim  any  far- 
ther interest  in  it  or  control  over  it.  It 
significantly  inlimated,  moreover,  the 
offerer's  desire  that  his  transgression 
might  be  put  upon  the  animal  thus  pre'- 
sented,  and  that  the  death  to  which  he 
now  devoted  it,  might  be  instead  of 
that  death  which  he  had  himself  most 
justly  deserved.  The  sinner  who  pre- 
sented the  victim  thus  disburdened  him- 
self of  the  sin  he  acknowledged  before 
Go"d,and  laid  the  weight  of  it  upon  the 
sacrifice.  It  ti)Us  taught  tiie  grand  gos- 
pel  doctrine    of   substitution. TT    It 

shall  be  accepted  for  him.       Ileb.   IJ 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  I. 


1$ 


on  the  head  of  the  burnt-offering ; 
and  it  shall  be  ^accepted  for  him 
gto  make  atonement  for  him. 


{  ch.  22.  21,  27. 
Phil.  4.  18.     e  ch. 


Isai.  66,  7.     Rom.  12.  1. 
I.  20,  26,  31,  35,  and  9.  7, 


}12Z"1]  nirtzdh  lo,  from  the  same  root 
with  "^122")  ralzon,  above  v.  3,  and  con* 
firming  the  interpretation  there  given. 
-'  T  To  make  an  atonement  for  him. 
Heb.  1153?  ""lEJDi  lekapptr  ulauv.  This 
was  the  great  purport  of  the  appoint* 
ment.  In  hope  of  this  the  worshipper 
brought  his  offering  ;  through  it  he 
sought  pardon  and  reconciliation  with 
God  ;  and  when  he  offered  it  rightly,  it 
became  an  atonement  for  him,  not  for 
any  value  of  its  own,  but  by  virtue  of 
that  great  sacrifice  which  it  prefigured. 
The  original  word  "iSiD  kaphar  signi- 
fies primarily  to  cover ;  not  so  much, 
however,  in  the  sense  of  wrapping  as 
with  a  garment,  as  in  that  of  smearing 
or  plaistering,  it  being  applied,  Gen.  G. 
14,  to  the  act  of  coating  the  ark  with 
pitch.  Its  radical  sense,  therefore,  is 
rather  that  of  an  adhesive  than  a  loose 
covering.  From  this  primary  notion  of 
covering,  it  came  to  be  applied  by  met- 
aphorical usage  to  the  appeasing  of 
anger,  or  to  that  act  of  an  offending 
party  by  which  he  succeeds  in  procuring 
favor  and  forgiveness  from  the  person 
or  party  offended.  In  this  sense  it  is 
applied  to  the  appeasing  of  an  angry 
countenance.  Gen.  32.  20,  '  For  he  said, 
I  will  appease  him,  (Heb.  will  cover  his 
face)  with  the  present.'  2  Sam.  21.  3, 
•  Wliat  sliall  I  do  for  you,  and  where- 
with shall  I  make  the  atonement  (Heb. 
cover)  V  Prov.  16.  14,  '  The  wrath  of  a 
king  is  as  messengers  of  death,  but  a 
wise  man  will  pacify  it  (Heb.  will 
cover  it).'  Its  predominant  usage  is  in 
relation  to  the  reconciliation  effected 
between  God  and  sinners,  in  which 
sense  atonement  for  sin  is  the  covering 
of  sin,  or  the  securing  the  sinner  from 
punishment.  Thus  when  sin  is  par- 
doned, or  its  consequent  calamity  re- 
moved,  the  sin  or  person  may  be  said  to 


5  And  he  shall  kill  the  bbullock 
before  the  Lord  :  iand  the  priests, 

and  16.  24.  Numb.  15.  25.  2  Chron.  29.  23, 
24.  Rom.  5.  11  h  Micah  6.  6.  '2  Chron. 
35.  11.     Heb.  10.  11. 


be  covered,  made  safe,  expiated,  or 
atoned.  Accordingly  we  find  the  par* 
don  of  sin  expressly  called  the  covering 
of  sin,  Nehem.  4.  4,  5,  '  Our  God  give 
them  for  a  prey  in  the  land  of  captivity, 
and  cover  not  iheir  iniquity,  and  let  not 
their  sin  be  blotted  out  from  before 
thee.'  Ps.  32.  1,  '  Blessed  is  he  whose 
transgression  is  forgiven,  whose  sin  is 
covered.'  Ps.  85. 2, '  Thou  hast  brought 
back  the  captivity  of  Jacob  ;  thou  hast 
forgiven  the  iniquity  of  thy  people ; 
thou  hast  covered  all  their  sin.'  All 
such  expiatory  offerings  pointed  direct* 
ly  to  Christ,  who  is  the  grand  atonC' 
ment  or  reconciliation  for  the  sins  of 
men.  Dan.  9.  24.  1  John  2.  2.  Heb. 
10,  8,  10.  The  burnt-offering,  it  is  to 
be  observed,  had  not,  like  the  sin-offer- 
ing,  respect  to  2iny  particular  sin,  but 
was  designed  to  make  atonement  foj'  sin 
in  general.  Thus  it  is  said  of  Job,  ch. 
1.  5,  That  he  '  offered  burnt-offerings, 
(saying.)  it  may  be  that  my  sons  have 
sinned.' 

5.  And  he  shall  kill  the  bullock,  Heb. 
isn^l  ve-shdhat ;  in  all  probably  an  in- 
stance of  the  usage  very  common  in 
Hebrew,  where  a  verb  is  employed  in  a 
kind  of  impersonal  sense,  equivalent  lo 
the  '  on  dit,'  one  says  of  the  French,  or 
the  *  man  sagt,'  id.  of  the  German,  both 
of  which  are  evidently  tantamount  to 
the  passive,  it  is  said.  The  expression 
before  us  is  not  intended,  we  conceive, 
lo  assert  that  the  offerer,  or  any  one  in 
particular,  was  to  kill  the  victim,  but 
simply  to  say  that  one,  some  one,  shall 
kill  it.  In  conformity  with  this  idea, 
the  Gr.  preserves  the  indefinite  form  of 
the  expression,  by  rendering  it  (rfa^ovciv 
they  shall  slay.  A  similar  phraseology 
appears  in  the  following  passages,  Gen. 
11.9,'  Therefore  is  the  name  of  it  call- 
ed Babel  (Heb.  ^rils  1?a'r  J^^p  one  called 


16 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


Aaron's  sons,  shall  bring  the  blood, 
kand  sprinkle  the  blood  round 
ibout  upon  the  altar  that  is  by 

k  ch.  3.  S.     Heb.  12.  24.     1  Pet.  1.  2. 

the  name  of  it  Sabel)J  Gen.  16.  14, 
'  Wherefore  the  well  was  called  (ii^p 
one  called  the  well)  Beer-lahai-roi.' 
Deut.  32.  37,  '  And  he  shall  say  (ItiS 
one  shall  say — it  shall  be  said)  where 
are  their  gods,'  &c.  Examples  of  this 
usage  might  be  almost  indefinitely  mul- 
tiplied, but  those  now  adduced  will 
probably  be  sufficient  to  confirm  our 
rendering  in  the  passage  before  us.  It 
is  highly  probable  that  the  ofi'erer  him- 
self and  the  common  Levites  united  in 
the  act  of  slaughtering  the  animal. 
Indeed  Patrick  labors  to  show  from 
Maimonides,  that  '  the  killing  of  the 
holy  things  might  lawfully  be  done  by 
a  stranger  (one  not  of  Aaron's  seed), 
yea,  of  the  most  holy  tilings,  whether 
they  were  the  holy  things  of  private 
persons,  or  of  the  whole  congregation.' 
This  would  appear  to  be  confirmed  by 
2  Chron.  30.  17,  where  it  is  said  that 
*'  there  were  many  in  the  congregation 
that  were  not  sanctified  ;  therefore  the 
Levites  had  charge  of  the  killing  of  the 
passovers  for  every  one  that  was  not 
clean  ;'  implying  that  if  they  had  been 
clean  they  would  have  been  authorized 

to  perform  the  service  themselves. 

IT  Sprinkle  the  blood  round  about,  ^-c. 
This  is  doubtless  the  true  sense  of  the 
original,  but  both  the  Gr.  and  the  Lat. 
render  it  by  the  stronger  term  '  pour,' 
'  pour  out.'  The  sprinkling  may  be 
supposed  perhaps  to  have  been  very 
copious,  as  Maimonides  tells  us  that 
the  priest  was  to  sprinkle  the  blood 
twice  on  the  upper  surface  of  the  altar, 
and  the  rest  of  the  blood  was  to  be 
poured  out  at  the  bottom  of  the  altar 
on  the  south  side — a  rite  to  which  there 
is  doubtless  allusion,  Rev.  6.  9,  *  I  saw 
under  the  altar  (i.  e.  at  the  bottom  of 
the  altar)  the  souls  of  them  that  were  t 
Rlain  for  the  word  of  God.'     As  the  life 


the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation. 

6  And  he   shall  flay  the  burnt- 
offering,  and  cut  it  into  his  pieces. 

or  soul  was  especially  in  the  blood,  so 
the  *  souls  under  the  altar,'  denotes  the 
blood  of  the  martyrs  plentifully  shedi 
and  flowing  as  a  sacrificial  offering  un- 
der  the  altar.  The  act  of  s])riukling 
the  blood  was,  during  every  jieriod  of 
the  Mosaic  economy,  exclusively  the 
prerogative  of  the  priesthood.  It  was 
in  the  effusion  of  blood,  which  is  the 
life,  that  the  virtue  of  the  sacrifice 
consisted,  it  being  always  understood 
that  life  went  to  redeem  life.  It  was 
calculated  and  probably  designed  to 
remind  the  offerer  that  he  deserved  to 
have  his  own  blood  shed  for  his  sins, 
and  alluded  moreover  to  the  pacifying 
and  purifying  of  the  blood  of  Jesus  shod 
for  us  for  the  remission  of  sins.  Every 
reader  of  the  New  Testament  knows 
how  much  our  salvation  is  attributed 
to  the  blood  of  Christ ;  and  this  great 
evangelical  truth  was  thus  taught  in 
shadow  to  the  Israelites  under  the  Law. 
They  were  by  this  rite  most  impres- 
sively taught  that  without  the  shedding 
of  blood  there  was  no  remission  of 
sins  ;  and  however  some  of  them  might 
have  dim  and  darkened  views  on  this 
subject,  while  the  veil  was  upon  their 
minds,  we  at  least  know  the  truth.  We 
know  that  the  blood  of  all  the  animals 
shed  at  the  altar  of  burnt-offering  owed 
all  its  excellency  to  its  being  a  type  of 
that  blood  of  Jesus  by  which  he  hath 
obtained  eternal  redemption  for  us. 

6.  He  shall  flay.  Gr.  Scipavrci  they 
having  flayed,  shall  divide,'  &c.  The 
Heb.  C'lT^n  hiphshit,  one  shall  flay, 
doubtless  affords  another  instance  of 
tlie  impersonal  form  of  speech  illus- 
trated above.  The  meaning  is  simply 
that  those  whose  oflice  it  was  to  per- 
form this  part  of  the  ceremony  should 
strip  the  skin  from  the  victim,  and  then 
cut   up  tha  body  into  its  appropriato 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  I. 


17 


7  And  the  sons  of  Aaron  the 
priest  shall  put  fire  upon  the  altar, 
and  Uay  the  wood  in  order  upon 
the  fire. 

8  And  the  priests,  Aaron's  sons, 

I  Gen.  22.  9. 


parts.  This  would  seem  from  2  Chron. 
29.  34,  to  have  been  usually  the  duty  of 
the  priests  ;  '  The  priests  were  too  few, 
and  not  able  to  flay  all  the  burnt-offer- 
ings ;  therefore  their  brethren  the  Le- 
vites  helped  them.'  The  skin  in  such 
cases,  it  is  to  be  remembered,  was  a 
part  of  the  perquisites  of  the  priest, 
Lev.  7.  8. — IT  Cut  it  into  his  pieces. 
That  is,  into  its  natural,  appropriate, 
suitable  pieces,  such  as  head,  neck, 
shoulders,  legs,  &c.,  or  as  the  Gr.  ren- 
ders it,  Kara  fteXii,  according  to  its  mem- 
bers. Chal.  '  He  shall  divide  it  by  the 
members  thereof.'  It  was  to  be  done 
in  an  orderly  and  systematic  manner, 
and  not  confusedly.  '  Why  were  not 
the  greater  members  cut  into  small 
pieces  ?  Because  it  is  written.  He 
shall  cut  it  into  the  pieces  thereof,  and 
not.  Shall  cut  it  into  pieces.'  Maimuni- 
des.  It  is  doubtless  in  allusion  to  this 
that  the  apostle  says,  2  Tim.  2.  15, 
'  rightly  dividing  (opSoro/zoDira)  the 
word  of  truth.' 

7.  Shall  put  fire.  Heb.  IT'^i^  13^3 
nuthenu  ish,  shall  give  fire  ;  by  which 
is  probably  meant  stirring  up,  cherish- 
ing, supplying  fuel  for,  the  fire  that  was 
originally  kindled  from  heaven,  and 
which  was  to  be  kept  perpetually  burn- 
ing  on  the  altar,  as  may  be  seen  from 
Lev.  6.  11. — IT  Lay  the  wood  in  order. 
Heb.  1;d'1j'  areku,  implying,  as  rightly 
rendered  in  our  version,  an  orderly  and 
methodical  arrangement,  and  spoken 
of  the  setting  or  furnishing  a  table, 
and  marshallin-g  the  ranks  of  an  army, 
Judg.  20.  22  ;  also  metaphorically  of 
the  proper  disposition  of  words  in  a 
prayer  or  discourse,  Ps.  5.  4.  Job,  32. 
14.— 37.  19 

2* 


shall  lay  the  parts,  the  head,  and 
the  fat,  in  order  upon  the  wood 
that  is  on  the  fire,  which  is  upon 
the  altar. 

9  But  his  inwards  and  his  legs 
shall  he  wash  in  water:  and  the 
priest  shall  burn  all  on  the  altar, 


8.  Shall  lay  the  parts.  Heb.  C^nrin 
hannethahim.  As  the  same  word  is 
rendered  in  v.  6.  '  pieces,'  it  would  have 
conduced  more  to  the  absolute  precision 
which  ought  to  be  consulted  in  every 
translation  of  the  Scriptures  to  have 
preserved  that  rendering  in  tlie  present 
instance.  Uniformity's  sake  alone  is 
often  sufficient  to  determine  a  transla- 
tor in  his  choice  of  one  out  of  two  or 
more  renderings.  This  regular  divid- 
ing and  laying  on  of  the  pieces  of  the 
sacrifice  was  observed  in  all  cases  of 
the  Burnt-offering.  Comp.  Ex.  29.  17, 
18.  1  Kings,  18.  23,  33.  Lev.  8.  20, 
21.— 9.  13. 

9.  His  inwards  and  his  legs  shall  he 
wash  in  water.  These  parts,  in  order 
that  no  filthy  adhesions  might  pollute 
the  sacred  offerings,  were  not  to  be 
burnt  upon  the  altar  until  they  had  been 
thoroughly  cleansed  by  washing  in  wa- 
ter ;  a  process  which,  according  to  Mai- 
monides,  was  three  times  repeated  be- 
fore the  ablution  was  thought  to  be 
complete.  The  typical  import  of  this 
ceremony  is  distinctly  intimated  by 
the  Apostle,  Heb.  10.  22,  '  Let  us  draw 
near  with  a  true  heart,  in  full  assurance 
of  faith,  having  our  liearts  sprinkled 
from  an  evil  conscience  and  our  bo- 
dies washed  with  pure  water.' — IT  The 
priest  shall  burn  all  on  the  altar.  Heb. 
T^upn  hiktir,  shall  burn  as  a  perfume, 
as  the  original  properly  implies.  See 
the  import  of  the  term  fully  explained 
in  the  Note  on  Ex.  29.  13.  It  is  not  the 
usual  word  for  consuming  by  fire,  and 
consequently  we  lose  in  our  translation 
the  peculiar  expressiveness  of  the  origi- 
nal, especially  when  taken  in  connex- 
ion with  what  follows. — '  The  burning 


18 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  a  1490. 


to  he  a  burnt-sacrifice,  an  offering 
made  by  fire,  of  a  msweet  savour 
unto  the  Lord. 

]  0  ^  And  if  his  offering  he  of  the 
flocks,  namely,  of  the  sheep,  or  of 
the  goats,  for  a  burnt-sacrifice;  he 
shall  bring  it  a  male  ^without 
blemish. 

11  oAnd  he  shall  kill  it  on  the 
side  of  the  altar  northward  before 
the  Lord  :  and  the  priests,  Aaron's 
sons,  shall  sprinkle  his  blood  round 
about  upon  the  altar  : 

12  And  he  shall  cut  it  into  his 
pieces,  with  his  head  and  his  fat : 

ra  Gen.  8.  21.  Ezek.  20.  28,  41.  2  Cor.  2. 
15.    Eph.  5.  2.    Phil.  4.  18.    "  ver.  3.    »  ver.  5. 

and  broiling  of  the  beasts  could  yield 
no  sweet  savor  ;  but  thereto  was  addt.'d 
wine,  oil,  and  incense,  by  God's  appoint- 
ment, and  then  there  was  a  savor  of 
rest  in  it.  Our  prayers,  as  from  us, 
would  never  please  ;  but  as  indited  by 
the  Spirit,  and  presented  by  Christ,  they 
are  highly  accepted  in  heaven.' — Trapp. 

IT  An  offering  made  by  fire,  of  a 

sweet  savor  unto  the  Lord.  Heb.  n^!P 
ni"!  mn*i:  niritrt/a/i  isUeh  riha  nihovah, 
a  fire-offering,  an  odor  of  rest  ;  or  as 
the  Gr.  renders  it, '  a  sacrifice  of  a  sweet- 
smelling  savor,'  which  words  the  apos- 
tle plainly  had  in  view  in  writing  Eph. 
5.  2,  '  Christ  hath  loved  us,  and  hath 
given  himself  for  us  an  offering  and  a 
sacrifice  to  God  for  a  sweet-smelling 
savor. ^  See  note  on  Gen.  8.  21.  Hence 
we  learn  that  the  holocaust,  or  whole 
burnt-offering,  which,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  skin,  was  entirely  consumed, 
no  part  of  it  being  left  even  for  the  food 
of  the  priests,  typified  the  sacrifice  and 
death  of  Christ  for  the  sins  of  the  world. 
Chal.  '  Which  shall  be  received  with 
favorable  acceptation  before  the  Lord.' 

The  Burnt-offering  of  the  Flock. 

10.  If  his  offering  be  of  the  flocks. 
In  the  divine  requirement  of  the  various 
oblations,  the  circumstances  of  the 
offerers  were    kiiidlv  consulted.      The 


and  the  priest  shall  lay  them  in 
order  on  the  wood  that  is  on  the 
fire  which  is  upon  the  altar : 

13  But  he  shall  wash  the  in- 
wards and  the  legs  with  water: 
and  the  priest  shall  bring  it  all, 
and  burn  it  upon  the  altar :  it  is  a 
burnt-sacrifice,  an  offering  made 
by  fire,  of  a  sweet  savour  unto  the 
Lord. 

14  H  And  if  the  burnt-sacrifice 
for  his  offering  to  the  Lord  be  of 
fowls,  then  he  shall  bring  his  of- 
fering of  pturtle-doves,  or  of  young 
pigeons. 

P  ch.  5.  7.  and  12.  8.     Luke  2.  24. 


less  wealthy,  who  could  not  so  well 
afford  to  offer  a  bullock,  would  bring  a 
sheep  or  a  goat ;  and  those  who  were 
not  able  to  do  that  were  expected  to 
bring  a  turtle-dove  or  a  young  pigeon. 
Thus  it  appears  that  the  parents  of  our 
Lord,  from  their  humble  circumstances 
in  life,  brought  this  latter  kind  of  offer- 
ing up«>n  the  purification  of  Mary,  Luke 
2.  23-25.  Indeed  it  will  be  observed 
throughout,  that  the  directions  respect- 
ing the  poor  man's  ofiering  are  as  mi- 
nute  and  particular  as  any  ;  intimating 
that  God  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  and 
that  his  ministers  are  to  be  as  anxious 
for  the  welfare,  and  as  attentive  to  tlie 
interests,  of  the  poorest  of  their  flock, 
as  of  the  most  opulent. 

1 1 .  On  the  side  of  the  altar  northicard. 
If  the  victim  had  been  shiin  on  the  east 
of  the  altar,  where  the  ashes  were  cast, 
it  might  have  obstructed  the  entrance 
to  the  court  ;  on  the  south  was  the 
ascent  to  the  altar,  and  on  the  west,  the 
tabernacle  ;  so  that  the  north  was  on  all 
accounts  the  most  convenient  quarter 
for  this  purpose,  not  only  for  the  slaugh- 
ter of  the  sheep,  but  also  of  all  the  other 
animals  offered. 
• 

The  Burnt-offering  of  Fowls. 

14.  Turtle  doves  or  of  young  pigeons. 
From  the  Heb.  ^"^n  tur  (toor)  comes  the 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  L 


19 


15  And  the  priest  shall  bring  it 
unto  the  altar,  and  wring  off  his 
head,  and  burn  it  on  the  altar  : 
and  the  blood  thereof  shall  be 
wrung  out  at  the  side  of  the  altar : 

16  And  he  shall  pluck  away  his 
crop  with  his  feathers,  and  cast  it 
qbeside  the  altar  on  the  east  part, 
by  the  place  of  the  ashes  : 

q  ch.  6.  10. 


Latin  '  turtur,'  and  the  English  '  turtle,' 
/fenerajly  rendered  '  turtle-dove.'  By  a 
beautiful  metaphor  this  bird  is  made  by 
Ihe  Psalmist  to  denote  the  church  :  Ps. 
74.  19, '  0  deliver  not  the  soul  of  thy 
turtle-dove  unto  the  multitude  of  the 
enemies.'  And  Solomon.  Cant.  2.  12, 
mentions  the  return  of  this  bird  as  one 
of  the  indications  of  spring  :  '  The 
voice  of  the  turtle  is  heard  in  our  land.' 
Young  pigeons  (Heb.  '  sons  of  the 
dove')  were  thought  preferable  for 
food  to  the  old,  whereas  the  full  grown 
turtle-dove  was  accounted  more  deli- 
cious than  the  young.  The  sacrifice 
was  ordered  accordingly. 

15.  Wring  off  the  head.  Heb.  n^)a 
mdlak.  The  original  term  occurs  only 
here  and  Lev.  5.  8,  so  that  we  are  chiefly 
dependent  upon  the  ancient  versions  for 
its  genuine  sense.  The  Sept.  renders  it 
by  (iTo/fn^w,  to  cut  with  the  nail.  It 
probably  means  to  make  a  section  or 
cut  in  the  head  by  pinching  it  with  the 
fingers  and  nails,  so  that  the  blood 
might  distil  from  the  wound.  In  this 
case  the  head  was  not  actually  separated 
from  the  body,  an  idea  which  would 
seem  to  be  confirmed  by  Lev.  5.  8, 
where  it  is  said  that  the  priest  should 
*  wring  off  his  head  (Heb  '  cut  with  the 
nail ')  but  sliould  not  divide  it  asunder ;' 
i.  e.  should  not  entirely  separate  any 
one  part  from  another.  Though  trans- 
lated '  wring,'  it  is  to  be  observed  that 
it  is  wholly  a  different  word  in  the  ori- 
ginal from  that  rendered  '  wrung '  in  the 
close  of  the  verse. 

16.  With  his  feathers  ;  or,  with  the 
filth  thereof.    The  latter  is  undoubtedly 


17  And  he  shall  cleave  it  with 
the  wings  thereof,  but  rshall  not 
divide  it  asunder :  and  the  priest 
shall  burn  it  upon  the  altar,  upon 
the  wood  that  is  upon  the  fire  : 
sit  is  a  burnt-sacrifice,  an  offering 
made  by  fire,  of  a  sweet  savour 
unto  the  Lord. 

'  Gen.  15.  10.     »  ver.  9.  13. 


the  true  rendering,  as  in  the  Heb.  the 
pronominal  suffix  for  '  his '  is  in  the 
feminine  gender,  necessarily  referring 
to  '  crop,'  and  not  to  '  bird.'  The  drift 
of  the  precept  is  to  order  that  the  crop 
or  maw  with  its  contents  should  be  cast 
away.  This  was  done  in  order  to  ren- 
der the  sacrifice  clean,  and  it  was  to  be 
cast  as  far  as  possible  from  the  most 
holy  place,  to  intimate  that  all  moral 
uncleanness  was  to  be  removed  from  the 
worship  of  God. 

17.  Shall  cleave  it  with  the  wings 
thereof.  That  is,  with  the  wings  still 
remaining,  though  partially  severed 
from  the  body.  The  sacrifice  of  birds, 
Maimonides  observes,  was  one  of  the 
most  difficult  services  of  the  sanctuary ; 
and  as  on  this  account  the  attention  of 
the  priest  was  not  less  engrossed  by  the 
poorest  sacrifice  than  by  the  most  splen- 
did, the  necessity  of  attending  to  minute 
details  in  the  duties  of  religion  was 
strikingly  inculcated. 

Remarks.— (1.)  God,  in  his  wisdom, 
has  seen  fit,  for  the  most  part  to  address 
his  creatures  through  the  intervention 
of  mediators ;  and  though  the  moral 
law  was  spoken  in  thunder  and  light- 
ning from  Sinai,  the  ceremonial  law, 
pointing  to  the  great  gospel  sacrifice, 
was  given  in  a  milder  voice  from  the 
mercy  seat. 

(2.)  Those  sacrifices  and  offerings 
are  peculiarly  acceptable  to  God,  which 
are  prompted  rather  by  volimtary  im- 
pulse than  by  legal  precept. 

(2.)  Although  the  light  of  nature 
alone  may  suggest  to  man  the  duty  of 
worshipping  the  Creator,  yet  ihe  proper 


20 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


mode  of  rendering  him  homage  is  not 
left  to  human  invention,  but  is  matter 
of  divine  revelation. 

(3.)  It  is  fit  that  the  offerings  which 
are  designed  for  the  greatest  and  best 
of  Beings,  the  infinitely  perfect  Jeho- 
Vith,  should  be  the  best,  and  most  per- 
fect of  their  kind.  *A  male  without 
blemish.' 

(4.)  In  all  our  religious  services  and 
sacrifices  our  faith  should  aim  to  lay 
its  hand  upon  the  head  of  the  one  great 
Atoning  Victim  for  sin.  Failing  of  this 
our  offerings  are  of  little  worth. 

(5.)  Were  it  not  for  the  solution 
afforded  in  tlie  gospel,  what  an  inexpli- 
cable mystery  would  be  the  whole  Jew- 
ish ritual  !  How  strange  the  fact  that 
the  temple  of  God  should  so  much  re- 
semble a  slaughter-house  ! 

(9.)  How  precious  in  the  estimation 
of  ihe  Most  High  must  be  the  merit  of 
Christ's  sacrifice,  that  it  should  avail  to 
convert  the  nauseous  odor  of  burning 
flesh  to  a  perfumed  and  refreshing  in- 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE   JIEAT-OFFERING, 

The  second  in  the  enumeration  of  the 
legal  offerings,  and  that  which  occu- 
pies the  present  chapter  is  the  Meat- 
offering. The  original  term  is  nHj^Q 
mill'' hah,  from  the  obsolete  root  'n'2)2 
mana'h,  to  give,  to  bestow,  and  is  equi- 
valent to  gift,  present,  oblation.  It  is 
not  exclusively,  though  it  is  predomi- 
nantly, applied  to  religious  offerings  of 
the  bloodless  species  made  to  God.  In 
some  cases,  it  is  spoken  of  gifts  pre- 
sented to  men,  as  Gen.  32.  13, '  And  he 
(Jacob)  took  of  that  which  he  had  with 
him  a  present  (nni'D)  for  Esau  his  bro- 
ther.' Gen.  43.  11,  'And  their  father 
Israel  said  unto  them,  Take  of  the  best 
fruits  of  the  land  in  your  vessels,  and 
carry  down  the  man  a  present  (nreia).' 
But  the  present  made  by  Jacob  to  Esau 
was  oi  living  things,  viz.  cattle,  where- 
as th&t  carried  to  Joseph  was  of  things 


that  had  not  life.  In  like  manner  both 
the  offering  of  Cain,  w^iich  was  of  the 
fruits  of  the  earth,  and  that  of  Abel, 
which  was  of  ihe  firstlings  of  the  flock. 
are  each  of  them  called  '  Min'hah,'  Gen. 
4.  3 — 5.  So  that  the  word  in  its  general 
import,  does  imply  things  slain  as  well 
as  things  not  slain,  although  some  com- 
mentators have  maintained  the  contrary. 
But  in  ordinary  usage,  its  meaning  was 
restricted  to  an  offering  made  of  fine 
flour,  whether  of  wheat  or  barley.  The 
common  rendering  of  the  term  in  the 
English  Bible  by  '  meat-offering'  is  in- 
correct according  to  the  modern  accep- 
tation of  the  word  '  meal,'  which  is 
now  applied  exclusively  to  flesh,  al- 
though at  the  time  when  our  translation 
was  made  it  appears  to  have  denoted 
very  nearly  the  same  as  tlie  word  *  food.' 
A  riiore  suitable  rendering  therefore  at 
the  present  day  would  be  '  meal-ofler- 
ing,'  '  flour-offering,'  or  even  '  bread- 
ofiering,'  as  the  flour,  before  it  was  of- 
fered, was  generally,  though  not  in  ever)' 
case,  made  into  thin  cakes  or  wafers,  or 
something  very  nearly  resembling 
bread.  The  materials  of  the  Meat-of- 
fering were  fine  flour,  with  oil  poured 
on  it,  and  frankincense  and  salt  added 
to  it.  The  flour  was  either  that  of 
wheat  or  barley,  and  might  be  presented 
in  the  form  of  flour,  or  it  might  be  pre- 
sented after  undergoing  the  process  of 
baking,  or  frying,  in  the  form  of  cakes 
or  wafers.  Sometimes  the  Meat-offer- 
ing, instead  of  being  made  of  fine  flour, 
consisted  of  the  first  fruits  of  the  corn. 
In  this  case  the  ears  were  to  be  taken 
when  full,  but  yet  green  ;  to  be  parched 
or  dried  before  the  fire  ;  the  corn  to  be 
beaten  out  ;  and  the  offering  then  to  be 
made  with  oil,  frankincense,  and  salt, 
as  before. 

The  Meat-offerings  were  either  pre- 
sented by  themselves,  or  as  an  accom- 
paniment to  the  stated  burnt-ofierings. 
In  the  latter  case  they,  together  with 
their  attendant  di ink-offerings,  were 
wholly  consumed  oa  the  altar  ;  but  in 


B.  C.  1490.J 


CHAPTER  II. 


21 


the  former,  they  were  burnt  only  in 
part,  the  remainder  being  given  to  the 
priests  for  their  support.  It  is  of  these 
that  the  present  chapter  treats.  The 
part  of  the  offering  which  was  burnt, 
together  with  the  frankincense,  was 
called  *  tlie  memorial'  of  it,  for  reasons 
which  are  assigned  in  the  note  on  v.  2. 
The  meat-offerings  which  were  not 
commanded  by  the  divine  law,  but  were 
ihe  votive  or  voluntary  oblations  of  in- 
Aividuals,  were  of  five  kinds,  consisting 
of  some  preparation  of  flour  ;  as 

1.  Fine  flour  unbaked. 

2.  Flour  baked  in  a  pan  or  on  a  flat 
plate. 

3.  Flour  baked  in  a  frying  pan. 

4.  Flour  baked  in  an  oven. 

5.  Flour  made  into  a  thin  cake  like  a 
(vafer. 

As  to  the  leading  moral  design  of  the 
meat-offering,  it  is  perhaps  to  be  re- 
garded as  mainly  a  grateful  acknow- 
Jedgment  of  the  bounty  and  beneficence 
of  God,  as  manifested  in  those  gifts  of 
his  providence  to  which  we  owe  our 
daily  bread,  and  the  various  ministra- 
tions to  our  physical  comfort.  At  the 
same  time,  it  is  not,  that  we  are  aware, 
at  all  inconsistent  with  this  to  suppose, 
that  it  might  also  have  had  a  typical 
purport  kindred  to  that  of  most  of  the 
sacrificial  offerings,  which  evidently 
pointed  to  Christ,  and  subordinalcly  to 
his  Church.  From  several  passages  it 
would  seem  natural  to  infer,  that  a 
propitiatory  as  well  as  a  eucharistic 
meaning  was  couched  under  this  cere- 
mony ;  and  if  so,  we  cannot  well  avoid 
the  inference  that  it  pointed  to  the 
offering  of  the  body  of  Christ  as  its 
grand  realizing  substance.  Thus  1 
Sam.  3.  14,  '  Therefore  I  have  sworn 
unto  the  house  of  Eli,  that  the  iniquity 
of  Eli's  house  shall  not  be  purged  with 
sacrifice  nor  offering  (tm'D  min'hah) 
forever.'  1  Sam.  26.  19, '  If  the  Lord 
have  stirred  thee  up  against  me,  let  him 
accept  (Heb.  smell)  an  offering 
(nnj?2).'     Therefore  when  Christ  had 


come,  he  caused  this  Meat-offering  as 
well  as  the  slain  sacrifices  to  cease  ; 
Dan.  9.  27, '  He  shall  cause  the  sacrifice 
and  the  oblation  (nriDTO)  to  cease.' 
And  of  the  poor  man's  meat  offering,  it 
is  expressly  said,  Lev.  5.  11-13,  that  it 
should  '  make  atonement  for  sins.' 
I'^om  this  it  appears  that  the  Scriptures 
join  the  Meat-offering  with  the  burnt- 
offering  as  an  expiation  for  sin  ;  and 
consequently  that  both  have  a  typical 
allusion  to  the  atoning  sacrifice  of 
Christ.  But  in  this  the  import  of  the 
Min'hah  does  not  seem  to  be  exhausted. 
It  represents  also  the  persons  and  ser- 
vices of  believers  made  acceptable  in 
Christ,  for  there  is  no  doubt  that  both 
Christ  and  his  Church  are  frequently 
shadowed  out  by  the  same  symbolical 
ordinances.  In  accordance  with  this 
we  find  it  said,  Is.  66.  20, '  They  shall 
bring  all  your  brethren  for  an  offering 
(nn3?3)  out  of  all  nations,  &c.,  as  the 
children  of  Israel  bring  an  offering 
(nri3?2)  in  a  clean  vessel  into  the  house 
of  the  Lord.'  The  accomplishment  of 
this,  the  apostle  intimates,  is  to  be  re- 
cognized in  the  results  of  his  own  min- 
istration of  the  gospel  to  the  Gentiles, 
Rom.  15.  16,  'That  1  should  be  the 
minister  of  Jesus  Christ  to  the  Gentiles, 
ministering  the  gospel  of  God,  that  the 
offering  up  (■::poacf)opn,oblation=TiTl'2'?2) 
of  the  Gentiles  might  be  acceptable, 
being  sanctified  by  the  Holy  Ghost.' 
But  it  is  not  thepcrso7?«only  of  believers 
that  we  behold  typically  set  forth  by 
this  offering.  Their  good  works,  their 
devoted  services,  the  fruits  of  their 
graces,  are  also  indicated  by  this  fea- 
ture of  the  ancient  economy.  Ps.  141. 
2, '  Let  my  prayer  be  set  forth  before 
thee,  and  the  lifting  up  of  my  hands  as 
the  evening  sacrifice  (nn^lO).'  So 
when  the  Most  High  assured  his  people, 
Mai.  1.  10,  that  he  '  would  not  accept 
an  offering  at  their  hands,'  he  adds,  v. 
11,  '  for  from  the  rising  of  the  sun  even 
unto  the  going  down  of  the  same,  my 
name  shall  be  great  among  the  Gen- 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


CHAPTER  11. 

And  when  any  will  oifer  aa  meat- 
offering unto   the  Lord,  his 

a  ch.  6.  14.  and  9.  17.    Num.  15.  4. 

tiles  ;  and  in  every  place  incense  shall 
be  offered  unio  my  name,  and  a  pure 
offering  (nTC'i)  ;'  and  this  is  fulfilled  ' 
when  '  men  pray  every  where,  lifting  up 
holy   hands.' — The    remaining    details  \ 
will  be  given  in  the  notes  that  follow.     1 

1.  And  when  any   will  offer.     Heb. 
Si"!pr,  "ij  ^£21  venephesh  ki  takrib, 
and  a  soul  when  it  shall  offer  ;  i.  e.  a 
person  or  man.     See  note  on  Gen.  2.  7. 
as  to  the  scriptural  import  of  the  word 
'  soul.'     The  English  idiom  is  precisely 
similar.    Thus  we  say  that  such  a  place 
contains  so  many  thousand  souls ;  and 
in  such  a   battle,  so   many  souls  per- 
ished.    Shakspeare  also  speaks  of  a 
ship   swallowed  in    the  sea,  and  the 
*  freighting  souls'  within  her. — IT  A  meat- 
offering.      Heb.  n^^2f2   "pip    korban 
min^hah,  a  gift-offering,  a  donative,  for 
it  is  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  offer- 
ing prescribed  in  this  chapter  Avas  also 
of  the  votive  or  voluntary  kind,  like  the 
animal  oblations  of  the  foregoing  chap- 
ter,  and  therefore  equally  with  them 
denominated    *p"lp  korban.  —  IT  Shall 
pour  oil  upon  it.    To  give  it  a  grateful 
relish,  making  it  more  palatable  to  the 
priests,  who  were  to  eat  part  of  it,  v.  3. 
Oil  was  to  the  food  of  the  Israelites 
"What  butter  is  to  ours.    We  see  from 
this  how  kindly  the  Most  High  consults 
the  gratification  of  his  servants  while 
ordering  the  provisions  of  his  own  ta- 
ble.    But  the  genius  of  the  Levitical 
institute  requires  us  to  look  beyond  this 
for  the  adequate  reason  for  the  use  of 
oil  in  these  rites.    This  substance  also 
has  a  mystical  or  symbolical  scope,  as 
we  have  shown  in  the  note  on  Ex.  29.  7. 
Its  unquestionable  import  is,  that  any 
offering  which  we  offer  should  have 
that  anotnhng  of  the  Holy  One  of  which 
John  speaks  so  largely  in  his  first  epis- 
tle.   That  oil  of  divine  grace,  that  prin- 


offering  shall  be  of  fine  flour ;  and 
he  shall  pour  oil  upon  it,  and  put 
frankincense  thereon  : 
2  And  he  shall  bring  it  to  Aaron's 


ciple  of  holiness,  which  the  Spirit  of 
the  Lord  pours  out  upon  the  true  be- 
liever's heart,  is   indispensable  to  the 
acceptance  of  our  spiritual  sacrifices. 
The  unction  of  love,  gratitude,  rever- 
ence, holy  joy,  and  of  every  gracious 
disposition,  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit  of 
grace,  must  be  present  to  impart  its  vir- 
tues to  our  oblations,  or  they  avail  us 
nothing.  —  tr    And   put    frankincense 
thereon.      In  order  to   cause  a   sweet 
smell  in  the  court  of  the  tabernacle, 
which  would  otherwise  have  been  of- 
fensive in  consequence  of  the  vast  quan- 
tities of  flesh  burnt  there.     But  this 
was  not  all.     The  frankincense,  like 
the  oil,  had  a  symbolical  allusion.    It 
represented  that  divine  mediation  and 
intercession    of   Christ,  by   which  he 
perfumes  and  renders  of  a  sweet  smell 
all  the  prayers,  praises,  good   works, 
and  holy  affections,  of  his   servants. 
He  is,  in  the  language  of  the  Song  of 
songs,  ch.  3.  6,  *  like  pillars  of  smoke, 
perfumed  with  myrrh  and  frankincense, 
and  all  powders  of  the  merchant.'    That 
the  frankincense  is  applicable  prima, 
rily  and  mainly  to  Christ  is  evident 
from  its  being  wholly  consumed  by  fire. 
No  part  of  his  work  is  borne  by  any  but 
himself;  nothing  renders  our  services 
acceptable  but  his  atoning,  justifying, 
interceding  grace.    But  when  this  fact 
is  cordially  admitted  by  us,  and  all  the 
favor  with  which  we  meet  attributed  to 
the  merit  and  mediation  of  Christ,  then 
our  services  for  his  honor  and  glory, 
our  oblations  to  his  priests  or  his  poor, 
our  works  of  beneficence  and  kindness 
wrought  for  his  sake, '  come  up  as  aa 
odor  of  a  sweet  smell,  a  sacrifice  ac. 
ceptable,  well-pleasing  to  God.'      As 
the  sacrifice  of  Christ  himself  was  most 
pleasing  unto  God,  so  are  the  services 
of  all  his  people  for  Christ's  sake. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  II. 


S3 


sons  the  priests:  and  he  shall  take  i  ing  made  by  fire  of  a  sweet  savour 
thereout  his  handful  of  the  flour  |unto  the  Lord: 
thereof,  and  of  the  oil  thereof,  with  |  3  And  cthe  remnant  of  the  meat- 
all  the  frankincense  thereof,  and  '  offering  shall  be  Aaron's  and  his 
the  priest  shall  burn  ^the  memorial  sons':  ^il  is  a  thing  most  holy  of 
of  it  upon  the  altar,  to  be  an  oifer-    the  offerings  of  the  Lord  made  by 

fire. 


b  ver.  9.  and  ch.  5 
Isa.  C6.  3.    Acts  10  A 


15.  and  24.  7.        c  ch.  7.  9.  and  10. 
i  Num.  18.  9. 


Exod.  29.  37. 


2.  Shall  take  thereout  his  handful. 
Heb.  f^apl  vekamets,  shall  grasp.  Of 
ihis  meal-offering  a  part  only,  that  is  to 
say,  about  an  handful,  was  burnt,  the 
rest  being  reserved  for  the  priests'  use  ; 
but  all  the  frankincense  was  burnt  be- 
cause from  it  the  priest  could  derive  no 
odvantage. — — IT  Shall  burn  the  memo- 
rial of  it.  Heb.  T'tSpn  hiktir,  shall 
reduce  it  to  fume  or  vapor,  shall  etapo- 
rate  it,  as  in  the  burning  of  incense. 
See  the  original  term  explained  in  the 
note  on  Ex.  29.  13.  The  part  of  the 
offering  which  the  priest  took  out  with 
his  hand  is  called  the  '  mennorial '  of 
the  meal  or  bread-offering,  because  it 
was  a  remembrancer  of  God's  supreme 
dominion,  a  grateful  acknowledgment 
that  they  held  and  enjoyed  every  thing 
of  him  as  sovereign  Proprietor,  and  by 
this  act  supplicated  the  continuance  of 
it.  It  was  designed  to  put  him  in  mind, 
as  it  were,  of  his  covenant  promise  to 
accept  the  services  of  his  people  ren- 
dered to  him  according  to  his  command- 
ment ;  in  allusion  to  which  it  is  said  by 
the  Psalmist,  Ps.  20.  4, '  The  Lord  re- 
member all  thine  offerings,  and  accept 
thy  burnt-sacrifices.'  Acts  14.  4,  *  Thy 
prayers  and  thine  alms  come  up  for  a 
memorial  before  God.'  The  sin  and 
jealousy-offerings,  on  the  other  hand, 
had  no  oil  or  incense  mixed  with  them, 
because  they  were  no  offerings  of  gra- 
cious memorial,  but  such  as  brought  in- 
iquity  to  remembrance,  and  were  there- 
fore devoid  of  those  elements  which 
made  ihem  come  up  as  a  sweet-smell- 
ing savor  before  the  Lord.  Comp.  Num. 
5.  15,  Lev,  5,  11.  A  very  prominent 
import  of  oil  as  a  symbol  is  that  of  joy, 


and  hence  it  was  employed  in  all  those 
sacrifices  which  had  respect  to  right- 
eousness, and  the  effects  of  which  were 
attended  with  joy  :  while  on  the  other 
hand  it  was  excluded  from  those  which 
had  respect  to  sin,  and  the  effect  of 
which  was  attended  mainly  witli  sorrow. 
3,  The  remnant  of  the  meat-offering 
shall  be  Aaron^s  and  his  sons'.  That  is, 
'  what  remains  after  the  priest  has  taken 
his  handful  of  the  flour  and  the  oil,  with 
all  the  frankincence,  this  shall  belong 
to  the  priests,  and  shall  be  eaten  by 
them  alone,  in  the  court  of  the  taberna- 
cle, as  a  '  thing  most  holy  ;'  whereas 
the  less  lioly  things,  as  tithes,  first 
fruits,  &c.,  might  be  eaten  by  their  sons 

and    daughters.    Deut.    12.  5. IT  A 

thing  most  holy.  Heb.  ^^Wlp  IDlp 
kodesh  kodoshim,  holiness  of  holinesses , 
the  Hebrew  mode  of  expressing  the 
superlative  degree.  A  common  dis- 
tinction was  made  by  the  Jews  between 
things  most  holy  and  the  lighter  holy 
things,  as  they  termed  them.  Of  the 
former  class  are  those  of  which  none 
whosoever,  or  none  but  the  priests  and 
the  sons  of  priests  might  eat,  and  that 
only  in  the  sanctuary.  Lev.  6.  16-26. 
Such  were  all  whole  burnt-offerings,  all 
the  sin-offerings,  and  all  the  peace-offer- 
ings for  the  whole  congregation.  The 
<  lighter  holy  things '  were  such  as 
might  be  eaten  by  those  who  were  not 
priests  in  any  place  within  the  camp, 
and  subsequently  within  the  city  of  Je- 
rusalem, as  all  the  peace-offerings  of 
particular  individuals,  t*he  paschal  lamb, 
the  tithes,  and  the  firstlings  of  cattle. 
In  regard  to  the  meal  or  bread-offering, 
it  has  been  moreover  suggested  that  a 


24  LEVITICUS.  [B.  C.  1490. 

4  H  And  if  thou  bring  an  oblation    of  a  meat-offering  baken   in  the 


particular  sacredness  attached  to  that 
from  its  having  been  designed  as  a  type 
of  the  Christian  sacrifice,  or  the  Lord's 
Supper,  in  which  it  was  virtually  con- 
tinued in  the  bread  made  of  fine  wheaten 
flour,  which  formed  a  part  of  that  ordi- 
nance. 

4.  Baken   in   an  oven.      Heb.  Il^ri 
n5X?3  ma'tphih  tannoon,the  baking  of 
the  oven.    As  there  were  several  ways 
in  which  the  bread  offering,  or  Min'hah 
might  be  prepared,  rules  are  here  given 
applicable  to  these  several  modes  ;  the 
first  case  being  where  it  was  baked  in 
an  oven  (Heb.  yTJTi  tannnr),  on  which 
we  subjoin  an  extended  article  from  the 
Pictorial  Bible,  in  loc.     '  The  ovens 
of  a  people  continually  on  the  move 
could  have  little  resemblance   to   our 
own,  and  we  can  only  discover  what 
they  probably  were  by  a  reference  to 
existing  usages  in  the  East.    The  trade 
of  a  baker  is  only  carried  on  in  large 
towns  ;   people  bake  their  own  bread 
daily  in  villages  and  encampments,  and 
to  a  very  considerable  extent  in  towns 
also.    It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  when 
individual  families  bake  every  day  so 
much  bread  only  as  is  required  for  that 
flay,  recollecting  at  the  same  time  that  i 
fuel  is  in  general  scarce,  it  is  necessary  j 
that  the  oven  should  be  small,  and  con-  j 
suming  but  little  fuel.    These  requisites  j 
are  fully  met   in   the   common  family  I 
ovens  of  Western  Asia.     That  which 
may  be  considered  the  most  general  is  ' 
a    circular   pit  in  the    earthen    floor,  ! 
usually  between  four  and  five  feet  deep, 
and  about  three  feet  in  diameter.    This 
pit  is  well  plastered  within  ;   and  the 
dough,  which  is  in  large  oval  or  round 
cakes — not  thicker  than  pancakes,  which 
in  appearance  they  very  much  resemble 
when     done  —  is     dexterously    thrown 
against  the  sides  of  the  pit,  which  has 
been  previously  heated,   and  has    the 
glowing    embers   still   at  the    bottom. 
This  cake  is  not  turned  ;  and,  from  its 


thinness,  is  completely  done  in  two  or 
three  minutes.     Its  moisture  being  then 
absorbed,  it  would  fall  from  the  sides 
of  the  oven  into  the  fire,  were  it  not  re- 
moved  in  proper  time.    This  bread  is 
usually  flexible  and  soft,  and  may  be 
rolled  up  like  paper  ;  but  if  suffered  to 
remain  long  enough,  it  becomes  hard 
and  crisp  on  the  side  which  has  been  in 
contact  with  the  oven  ;  but  it  is  seldom 
suflfered  to  attain  this  state,  although 
we,  who  have  lived  for  about  two  years 
on  this  sort  of  bread,  thought  it  far  pref- 
erable in  this  form.     It  is  to  be  ob- 
served, that  this  pit  is  not  exclusively 
an  oven,  but,  particularly  in  Persia,  is 
often  the   only  fire-place  for  general 
purposes  which  is  to  be  found  in  cot- 
tages, and  even  in  some  decent  houses. 
Whether  these  were  the  '  ovens'  of  the 
Hebrews  in  the  desert,  it  is  difficult  to 
determine.      They    are    formed    with 
little  expense  or  labor  ;  but  are  more 
generally  found  in  towns  and  villages 
than  among  the  nomade  tribes  of  the 
desert.      The   other  things  resembling 
ovens,  act  more   or  less  upon  the  same 
principle   as  that  which  we   have   de- 
scribed.    They  are  of  various  kinds ; 
but  they  may  generally  be  described  as 
strong  unglazed  earthen  vessels,  which 
being  heated  by  an   internal   fire,,  the 
bread  is  baked  by  being  stuck  against 
the  sides,  in  the  manner  already  noticed. 
Either  the  interior  or  outer  surface  is 
used  for  this  purpose,  according  to  the 
construction  of  the  vessel,  and  the  de- 
scription of  bread  required.    The  com- 
mon bread  is  sometimes  baked  on  the 
outside  of  the  heated  vessel ;  and  thus 
also  is  baked  a  kind  of  large  crisp  bis- 
cuit, as  thin  as  a  wafer,  which  is  made 
by  the  application  of  a  soft  paste  to  the 
heated  surface,  which  bakes  it  in  an  in- 
stant.    Of  this  description,  no  doubt,  is 
the  wafer-bread  which   we    find   men- 
tioned in  V.  4  and  elsewhere.    The  ovens 
of  this  sort  with  which  the  writer  is 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  II. 


25 


oven,  it  shall  be  unleavened  cakes 
of  fine  flour  mingled  with  oil,  or 
unleavened  wafers  eanointed  with 
oi!. 

e  Exod.  29.  2. 

most  rarniliar  are  nearly  ihree  iect  high, 
t'.iid  ubdut  fifteen  inches  in  diameter  at 
liie  top,  which  is  open.  It  grddually 
widens  to  ihe  bottom,  where  there  is  a 
tide  u'lX  the  convenience  of  withdraw- 
h;\T  I  he  aslies.  When  the  inside  is  ex- 
vlnNively  nsed  for  b.iking',  the  oiUside 
is  ii^uil'y  coated  with  clay,  the  better 
1.)  concentrate  the  heat.  We  have  seen 
tliem  used  under  various  circumstances. 
f:ven  the  vessels  navigating  the  Tigris 
arc  usually  furnished  v,/iih  one  of  them, 
•for  baking  tiie  daily  supply  of  bread  ; 
a'.id  tliey  are  sometimes  built  to  the 
d.-cK-  for  standing  use.  The  Arab  sail- 
or's have  them  also  in  their  vessels  on 
ll.e  Red  Sea,  and  elsewhere.  Some- 
liii.cs  a  large  water-vessel,  with  the 
bottom  knocked  out,  is  made  to  serve 
us  a  substitute,  and  goes  by  the  same 
name.  This  name  (tenur)  is  as  nearly 
us  possible,  the  original  Hebrew  word 
~i^;?3  taiinar,  translated  '  oven  '  in  the 
text.  Ovens,  somewhat  similar,  are 
frequently  used  in  houses  in  the  place 
of  the  hole  in  the  floor  already  men- 
tioned, especially  in  apartments  which 
have  not  the  ground  for  their  floor. 
They  are  then  not  only  used  for  cooking 
and  baking  bread,  but  for  warming  the 
apartment.  The  top  is  then  covered 
with  a  board,  and  over  this  a  large 
cloth  or  counterpane  is  spread,  and  the 
people  sit  around,  covering  their  legs 
and  laps  with  the  counterpane.  So  also 
the  pit  in  the  floor,  when  not  in  use  for 
cooking  or  baking  bread,  is  in  winter 
covered  over,  and  warms  the  apartment, 
in  much  the  same  manner.  It  remains 
to  add,  that  bread  is  sometimes  baked 
on  an  iron-plate  placed  over  the  opening 
at  the  top  of  the  oven.  That  the  ovens 
of  the  Israelites  m  the  desert  were  some- 
thing  on  the  prmciple  of  these  earthen 
ovens,  there  is  not  much  reason  to 
3 


5  H  And  if  thy  oblation  be  a  meat- 
offering Saken  in  a  pan,  it  shall  be 
of  fine  iiour  unleavened,  mingled 


with  oil. 


question  ;  and  it  is  equally  probable 
that  those  ovens  which  are  mentione<l 
after  their  settlement  in  Palestine  were 
one  of  the  two,  or  both  the  modifications 
of  the  same  principle  which  we  have 
described  as  being  ordinarily  exhibited 
in  the  houses  of  Western  Asia.' — Pict. 

Bib. "^  Unleavened  cakes.  Heb.  Til^n 

ri!ll>2  halloth  matzoth,  cakes  of  unlea- 
vened7iesses,  an  intensitive  niode  of  ex- 
pressiiin  equivalent  to  '  altogether  un- 
leavened.' On  the  import  of  leaven  in 
the  system  of  sacrifices  see  note  on  Ex. 

12. 8. 51  Mingled  with  oil.     See  note 

on  Ex.  29.  2.  If  the  cakes  were  made 
soineuhat  thick,  the  oil  w^as  poured  in 
and  mingled  in  the  kneading  ;  but  if 
they  were  thin  like  a  wafer,  the  oil  was 
only  smeared  over  the  surface,  simply 
to  anoint  the  substance,  but  whether 
before  or  after  the  baking,  is  un::ertain, 
though  Maimonides  supposes  the  latter. 
5.  Baken  in  a  pan.  Heb.  r^ri/On  ii3> 
al  hammahabath.  '  Dr.  Boothroyd, 
availing  himself  of  our  now  improved 
knowledge  of  the  East,  translates  <  on  a 
fire-plate,'  instead  oi '  in  a  pan.'  He  is 
doubtless  correct.  In  the  preceding 
note  we  have  mentioned  a  mode  of 
baking  bread  on  an  iron  plate  laid  on 
the  top  of  the  oven  ;  but  a  more  simple 
and  primitive  use  of  a  baking  plate  is 
exemplified  among  the  nomade  tribes  of 
Asia.  We  first  witnessed  the  process 
at  a  small  encampment  of  Eelauts  in 
the  north  of  Persia.  There  was  a  con- 
vex plate  of  iron  (copper  is  often  in  use) 
placed  horizontally  about  nine  inches 
from  the  ground,  the  edges  being  sup- 
ported  by  stones.  There  was  a  slow 
fire  underneath,  and  the  large  thin  cakes 
were  laid  upon  the  upper  or  convex  sur- 
face, and  baked  with  the  same  effect  as 
when  stuck  to  the  sides  of  an  oven  ;  but 
rather  more   slowly.     The  thin  wafer 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490, 


6  Thou  shalt  part  it  in  pieces, 
and  pour  oil  tliereon  :  it  is  a  meat- 
offering. 

7  H  And   if  thv    oblation   be   a 


bread  of  soft  paste  can  be  baked  by  the 
same  process,  which  is  recommended  to 
the  wandering  tribes  by  the  s^implicity 
and  portability  of  the  apparatus.  We 
believe  that  a  flat  plate  is  sometimes 
employed  in  this  way,  though  we  do  not 
recollect  to  have  witnessed  its  use. 
Chardin  thinks  that  ihis  process  was  in 
use  long  before  ovens  of  any  kind  were 
known  ;  and  he  is  probably  right.  Un- 
leavened oatmeal  cakes,  baked  on  an 
iron  plate  tailed  a  'girdle/  are  still 
very  general  in  Scotland,  and  also  in  the 
north  of  England.'— P/c?.  Bib. 

6.  Thou  shalt  part  it  in  pieces,  and 
pour  oil  thereon.  '  We  here  see  bread, 
after  being  baked,  broken  up  again  and 
mingled  with  oil.  Was  this  an  extraor- 
dinary and  peculiar  preparation  for  the 
altar,  or  was  it  a  preparation  in  com- 
mon use  among  the  Hebrews?  We  in- 
cline to  the  latter  opinion^  as  it  seems 
to  differ  very  little  from  a  common  and 
standard  dish  among  the  Bedouin  Arabs. 
This  is  made  o{ unleavened  paste,  baked 
in  thin  cakes,  which  are  afterwards 
broken  up,  and  thoroughly  kneaded  with 
butter,  adding  sometimes  honey,  and 
sometimes  milk,  but  generally  employ- 
ing  butter  alone  for  the  purpose.  This 
second  kneading  brings  it  into  the  state 
in  which  it  is  eaten  with  great  satisfac- 
tion by  the  Arabs.  The  only  difference 
between  this  and  the  preparation  in  the 
text,  is  the  use  of  butter  instead  of  oil  ; 
and  in  its  not  being  said  here  that  the 
bread  was  kneaded  anew,  but  only  that 
it  was  broken  up  and  mingled  with  oil. 
These  points  of  difference  are  not  very 
essential.  The  Bedouins,  as  a  pastoral 
people,  have  no  oil  ;  but  are  very  fond 
of  it  when  it  can  be  obtained  :  butter, 
therefore,  as  used  by  them,  may  be  re- 
garded as  a  substitute  for  the  '  oil '  of 
the  text.  And  as  to  the  want  of  a 
second  kneading  in  the  text,  it  is  by  no 


meat-offering  halen  in  the  frying- 
pan,  it  shall  be  made  of  tine  flour 
with  oil. 

8  And  thou  shalt  bring  the  meat- 
means  certain  that  such  kneading  did 
not  take  place,  even  though  it  is  not 
mentioned.  Besides  the  Bedouins  do 
not  always  knead  the  broken  bread 
again  with  butter,  but  are  content  to 
soak  or  dip  the  broken  morsels  in  melt- 
ed butter.  It  is  probable  that  the  pre- 
sent text  explains  the  mingling  with  oil 
mentioned  in  vv.  4  and  7,  better  than  by 
supposing  that  the  paste  was  tempered 
with  oil  before  being  baked.  Using  oil 
with  bread  continues  to  be  a  very  com- 
mon practice  in  the  East ;  and  the 
Bedouin  Arabs,  and  generally  other 
Orientals,  are  fond  of  dishes  composed 
of  broken  bread,  steeped  not  only  in  oil, 
butter,  and  milk,  but  also  in  prepara- 
tions of  honey,  syrups,  and  vegetable 
juices.  Oil  only  is  allowed  in  the 
'  meat  offerings,'  honey  being  expressly 
interdicted  in  v,  1],  and  this  shows  that 
the  use  of  honey  with  bread  was  even 
thus  early  common  among  the  Israel- 
ites.'—Pjcf.  Bih. 

7.  Baken  in  the  frying-pan.  '  There 
is  in  use  among  the  Bedouins  and  others 
a  shallow  earthen  vessel,  somewhat  re- 
sembling a  frying-pan,  and  which  is 
used  both  for  frying,  and  for  baking  one 
sort  of  bread.  Something  of  this  sort 
is  thought  to  be  intended  here.  There 
is  also  used  in  Western  Asia  a  modifi- 
cation of  this  pan,  resembling  the  East- 
ern oven,  which  Jerome  describes  as  a 
round  vessel  of  copper,  blackened  on  the 
outside  by  the  surrounding  fire,  which 
heats  it  within.  This  might  be  either 
the  '  oven '  or  the  '  pan  '  of  the  present 
chapter.  This  pan-baking  is  common 
enough  in  England,  where  the  villagers 
bake  large  loaves  under  inverted  round 
iron  pots,  with  embers  and  slow-burning 
fuel  heaped  upon  them.  But  it  is  pro- 
bable that  the  fire-plate,  which  we  have 
noticed  under  v.  5,  is  really  intended 
here,  and  that  the  '  pan '  there,  is  the 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  II. 


27 


offering  that  is  made  of  these  things 
unto  the  Lord  :  and  when  it  is 
presented  unto  the  priest,  he  shall 
bring  it  unto  the  aliar. 

9  And  the  priest  shall  take  from 
the  meat-otfering  <a  memorial 
thereof,  and  shall  burn  it  upon  the 
altar:  it  is  an  goffering  made  by 
fire,  of  a  sweet  savour  unto  the 
Lord. 

10  And  inhat  Avhich  is  left  of  the 
meat-offering  shall  bi  Aaron's  and 
his  sons';  it  is  a  thing  most  holy, 
of  the  offerings  of  the  Lord  made 
bv  fire. 


Exod.  29.  !S.     ^  ver.  3. 


*  frying-pan  '  of  ihe  present  text.  This 
soenis  to  us  very  probable,  as  the  name 
given  by  the  Bedouins  to  this  utensil  is 
(ajen,  which  is  nearly  identical  with  the 
name  (rrjyavov)  which  the  Septuagint 
gives  to  the  '  pan  '  in  v.  5.  It  is  useful 
to  obtain  this  etymological  identifica- 
tion of  the  Arabian  tajen  with  one  of  the 
'  pans  '  of  this  chapter,  but  it  is  of  little 
importance  to  determine  which  '  pan'  it 
is.  Upon  the  wliole,  the  oven,  the  pan, 
and  the  frying-pan  of  vv.  4,  5,  and  7, 
may,  as  it  appears  to  us,  be  referred 
with  much  confidence  to  the  clay  oven, 
the  metal  plate,  and  the  earthen  vessel 
which  we  have  noticed.' — Pict.  Bib. 

11.  No  leaven  nor  any  honey.  That 
is,  as  it  should  seem,  neither  sour  nor 
sueet  ;  nothing  of  the  fermenting  kind, 
which  would  have  an  unkindly  effect, 
when  eaten,  upon  the  animal  economy. 
But  here  also,  we  trace  a  moral  mean- 
ing. Leaven  is  a  well-known  emblem 
of  pride  and  hypocrisy.  These  swell 
the  heart,  and  puff  it  up  with  self  im- 
portance and  selfdeceit.  This  was 
especially  the  leaven  of  the  Pharisees, 
■who  made  their  prayers,  and  gave  their 
alms,  and  did  all,  to  be  seen  of  men. 
Leaven  is  also  used  as  an  emblem  of 
malice  and  wickedness,  as  we  learn 
from  the  words  of  the  Apostle,  1  Cor. 
5.  8; '  Therefore  let  us  keep  the  feast, 


11  No  meat-offering  which  ye 
shall  bring  unto  the  Lord  shall  be 
made  with  Ueaven  :  for  ye  shall 
burn  no  leaven,  nor  any  honey,  in 
any  offering  of  the  Lord  made  by 
fire. 

12  H  kAs  for  the  oblation  of  the 
first-fruits,  ye  shall  offer  them  unto 
the  Lord:  but  they  shall  not  be 
burnt  on  the  altar  for  a  sweet  sa- 
vour. 

13  And  every  oblation  of  thy 
meat-offering    'shalt  thou    season 

i  ch.  6.  17.  See  Malt.  16.  12.  Mark  8. 
15.  Luke  12.  1.  1  Cor.  5.  8  GaJ.  5.  9. 
k  Exod.  22.  29.  ch.  23.  10,  11.  i  Mark  9. 
49.     Col.  4.  6. 


not  with  the  old  leaven,  neither  with 
the  leaven  of  malice  and  wickedness, 
but  with  the  unleavened  bread  of  sincer- 
ity and  truth.'  Honey,  in  like  man- 
ner, may  well  be  considered  as  the  em- 
blem of  the  unwholesome  sweetness  of 
sensual  indulgence  and  worldly  plea- 
sure. And  these  we  are  well  assured 
are  perfectly  inconsistent  with  the  ac- 
ceptance of  any  offering  which  we  may 
profess  to  bring  to  God.  The  honey  of 
sensual  gratification  will  make  polluted 
and  abominable  any  religious  oblation 
with  which  it  may  be  mixed. 

12.  As  for  the  oblation  of  the  first- 
fruits,  ye  shall  offer  them,  fyc.  Ains- 
worth  very  plausibly  suggests  that  this 
is  but  a  continuation  of  the  ordinance 
respecting  the  use  of  leaven  and  honey, 
of  which,  and  not  of  first-fruits,  he  un- 
derstands the  word  '  them'  in  this  con- 
nexion. The  verse  contains  a  single 
exception  to  the  rule  given  above. 
There  was  one  case  in  which  leaven 
and  honey  might  be  used,  to  wit,  with 
the  first-fVuits.  With  them  they  might 
be  offered,  but  not  burnt  upon  the  altar. 
This  also  is  the  interpretation  of  Ro- 
senmuller. 

13.  Every  oblation  of  thy  meat-offer- 
ing shall  thou  season  with  salt.  Salt  is 
the  opposite  to  leaven,  as  it  preserves 
from  putrefaction  and  corruption,  and 


2S 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


was  therefore  used  to  signify  the  purity 
and  persevering  fidelity  necessary  in 
the  worsliippcis  of  God.  It  was  called 
the  '  salt  o(  the  covenant,'  because  as 
salt  was  incorruptible,  so  was  tiie  cove- 
n:inl  and  promise  of  Jehovah,  which  on 
this  account  is  called  2  Chron.  13.  5, '  a 
C'lvenant  of  salt  ;'  i.  e.  an  everlasting 
ft.vpuant.  But  in  order  to  obtain  an 
K.itqiiale  idea  of  the  reasons  which 
}"niuipted  the  use  of  this  article,  and 
ui.uie  it  so  indispensable  in  the  services 
of  the  Jewish  altar,  we  are  to  remem- 
ber tiial  the  sacrifices  were  a  kind  of 
feast,  in  wliicli  those  who  partook  of 
llicni  were  for  the  lime  being  the  guests 
(if  God,  and  eating  and  drinking  at  his 
table.  But  it  was  by  eating  and  drink- 
ing  together,  that  all  important  cove- 
nants were  anciently  ratified  and  con- 
finned,  and  as  salt  was  of  course  never 
wanting  at  such  entertainments,  it  came 
;it  length  to  be  regarded  as  a  symbol  of 
friendship,  and  the  phrase  *  covenant 
of  salt'  was  but  another  name  for  the 
most  firm,  enduring,  and  inviolable 
compact.  In  like  manner,  salt  among 
the  ancients  was  the  emblem  of  friend- 
ship and  fidelit}',  and  therefore  was  used 
in  all  their  sacrifices  and  covenants. 
No  part  of  their  religious  ceremonies  is 
more  prominent  than  that  which  con- 
sists in  the  use  of  salt.  Thus  in  Vir- 
gil, iEn.  Lib.  II.  1.  133: 

'  Mihi  sacra  parari 
Et  salsae  fruges,  et  circum  tempora  vittai.' 

'  For  me  the  sacred  rites  were  prepared, 
and  the  salted  cake,  and  fillets  to  bind 
about  my  temples.'  Servius'  explana- 
tion is,  '  Salt  and  barley,  called  salted 
meal,  with  which  they  used  to  sprinkle 
the  forehead  of  the  victim,  the  sacrifi- 
cial fire,  and  the  knives.'  From  the 
*  mola  salsa,'  salted  cake,  of  the  Latins, 
were  derived  the  words  immolo,  immO' 
latio,  to  immolate,  immolation,  and  this 
by  synecdoche  came  to  be  applied  to 
the  whole  process  of  sacrificing.  So 
after  the  salted  meal  it  was  customary 
to  pour  wine  on  the  head  of  the  victim, 


which  by  that  ceremony  was  said  to  be 
macta,  i.  magis  aucta,  augmented  or  in' 
creased,  whence  the  term  mactalio  in 
the  heathen  sacrifices  to  express  the 
killing  of  the  victim  immediately  after 
the  affusion  of  the  wine.  But  as  to  the 
sacred  use  of  salt  Homer  affords  several 
distinct  allusions  to  it  in  the  religious 
rites  mentioned  in  the  Iliad.    Thus: — 

*  Then  near  the  altar  of  the  darling  king, 
Disposed  in  rank,  their  hecatoinb  tliey  bring  ; 
With  water  purify  their  liands  and  take 
The  sacred  offering  of  the  salted  cake.' 

II.  I.  1.  584 

And  again  : — 

'  Above  the  coals  the  smoking  fragment  burns, 
And  sprinkles  sacred  salt  from  lifted  urns.' 
Il,  IX.  1.  281. 

Nearly  every  traveler  who  has  visited 
the  modern  nations  of  the  p>ast,  lias  fur- 
nished us  with  striking  anecdotes  illus- 
trative of  the  sacredness  with  which 
salt  was  regarded  as  an  emblem  of 
fidelity  in  all  their  compacts.  Thus 
Baron  Du  Tott,  speaking  of  one  who 
was  desirous  of  his  acquaintance,  says, 
upon  his  departure,  '  He  promised  in  a 
short  time  to  return.  I  had  already 
attended  him  half  way  down  the  stair- 
case, when  stopping,  and  turning  briskly 
to  one  of  my  domestics.  Bring  me  direct- 
ly,  said  he,  some  bread  and  salt.  What 
he  requested  was  brought ;  when,  taking 
a  little  salt  between  his  fingers,  and  put- 
ting it  with  a  mysterious  air  on  a  bit  of 
bread,  he  eat  it  with  a  devout  gravity, 
assuring  me  that  I  might  now  rely  on 
him.'  And  D'Herbelot  remarks,  that 
'  among  other  exploits  which  are  re- 
corded of  Jacoub  hen  Laith,  he  is  said 
to  have  broken  into  a  palace,  and  having 
collected  a  very  large  booty,  which  he 
was  on  the  point  of  carrying  away,  he 
found  his  foot  kicked  something  which 
made  him  stumble  ;  putting  it  to  his 
mouth,  the  better  to  distinguish  it,  his 
tongue  soon  informed  liim  it  was  a  lump 
of  salt  ;  upon  this,  according  to  the 
morality,  or  rather  superstition,  of  the 
country,  where  the  people  considered 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  IL 


29 


with  salt;  neither  shalt  thou  suffer 
D'the  salt  of  the  covenant  of  thv 
God  to  be  lackino-  from  thy  meat- 
olfering:  "with  all  thine  offerings 
thou  shall  offer  salt. 

U  And  if  thou  offer  a  meat-offer- 
I'Ai^  of  thy  first-fruits  unto  the 
l.uiii),  "fhou  shah  offer  for  the 
Kieai-cirering  of  tiiy  first-fruits, 
.'■iHv'u  cars    of  corn   dried  by  the 

'■■  >Ux:uh.   13.   19.      "  Ezek.  43.  24.      »  ch. 

•:!•;   rj.  14. 


>  lii  I-  ;i  syiiiboi  and  pledge  of  hospi- 
i  ■.:  J.  ,  ir-  wai  so  touclied  lliul  lie  lefl  all 
h-.-  i^'^'-y,  ifliring  wiihoul  taking  away 

J!  r,     il.i.iy     with    liiiii." IF    NcitJier 

s  i-iU  (uiu  suffer,  ^-c.  That  is,  ye  are 
v.<-i  to  iiiiagiiie,  thai  because  llie  Lord's 
.-ii;u  ■  o;  tile  oHering  is  to  be  consumed 
I;,  ii.'  ,  ,;iiil  not.  reall}'  eaten,  ye  may 
iii'i!.;ix-  ilisj)ense  willi  seasoning  it. 
L.  i_,  tiling'  liiat  is  oflered  to  him  must 
!.f-  liic  i)-i>i  an;l  most  savory  of  its  kind. 
14.  Gieen  earn  of  corn  dried  by  the 
Jiri'.  'i  ii<'y  di  ieti  iheiii  in  the  fire,  in 
ih'-  -ft  (  u  car,  because  that  otlierwise 
If.  .11    ilieir    moisture    lliey    would    not 

Hl:;iit  of  being  ground   in  a   mill. 

'a    C'jrn  beaten  out  of  full  ears.     Heb. 
Z"-""]!!  'Il'^Ji  gcres  karmel,  small  broken 
iMH   of  the  green   ear.     The   original 
h'.'b.  "J-j^  gcres,  has  the  import  of  some- 
thing  crushed,    broken,    pounded,    for 
wliich  the  Chal.  has  '  broken-grains,'  or 
us  we  shouhi  term  it,  '  grits.'     The  Gr. 
ronib.M-s  the  whole  clause  vta  Tuppvyucva 
^^ic.oa    cvura    young    parched    grains 
broken  in  the  mill.     Tliese  first  fruits 
Iwd  a  typical  reference  to  Christ,  who 
is  thus  denominated,  1  Cor.  15.20,  and 
by  whom  all  the  rest   of  the  harvest  is 
sanctiiied.     To  the   preparatory  parch-  I 
iiig,  breaking,  and  grinding,  we  see  per- 
haps an  allusion  in  the  words  of  the  pro-  | 
phet,  Is.  53.  5,  '  He  was  wounded  for  j 
our  iransgressions,   he  was  bruised  for  i 
ou»"  iniquities.' 

Peju^rks. — (3.)  '  The  remnant  of  the 
"V  4-oiTering     sliall    be    Aaron's.'      In 
:'     y  dispensation   God    has   evinc^ii   a 
3* 


fire,  even  corn  beaten  out  of  pfuU 
ears. 

15  And  qthou  shaft  put  oil  upon 
it,  and  lay  frankincense  thereon  : 
it  is  a  meat-offering. 

16  And  the  priest  shall  burn  rthe 
memorial  of  it,  part  of  the  beaten 
corn  thereof,  and  pari  of  the  oil 
thereof,  with  all  the  frankincense 
thereof:  it  is  an  offering  made  by- 
fire  unto  the  Lord. 

P  2  Killers  4.  42.     q  ver.  1.     ^  ver.  2. 


kind  concern  for  the  maintenance  of 
those  who  were  devoted  to  ministry  in 
sacred  things.  Those  who  labor  in  the 
word  are  to  be  competently  supported. 
'  Do  ye  not  know  that  they  which  min- 
ister  about  holy  things  live  of  the  things 
of  the  temple?  And  they  which  wait 
at  the  altar  are  partakers  with  ihe  altar. 
Even  so  hath  the  Lord  ordained  that 
ihey  which  preach  the  Gospel  should 
live  of  the  Gospel.'  1  Cor.  9.  13,  14. 

(S.)  'When  it  is  presented  unto  the 
priest.'  As  none  of  the  ancient  sacred 
offerings  were  to  be  presented  immC' 
diately  to  God,  but  were  first  put  into 
the  hand  of  the  priest,  and  through  him 
offered  upon  the  altar,  so  spiritual 
sacrifices  under  the  Gospel  are  not 
available  in  the  sight  of  God,  unless 
tendered  to  him  through  Jesus  Christ, 
the  great  High  Priest  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament. 

(II.)  Especial  care  is  to  be  taken 
not  only  that  our  religious  services  be 
cleansed  from  the  leaven  of  hypocrisj^, 
but  that  they  be  thoroughly  pervaded  by 
the  'salt'  of  grace.  Col.  4.  6,  'Let 
your  speech  be  always  with  salt,  sea- 
soned with  grace.'  Mark  9,  49,  '  Every 
sacrifice  shall  be  seasoned  with  salt.' 

(14.)  If  the  'first-fruits'  of  the  har- 
vest field  were  of  old  so  peculiarly  ac- 
ceptable to  God,  how  much  more  must 
he  be  pleased  now  with  the  first-fruits 
of  the  Spirit,  and  the  expressions  of  an 
early  piety  in  the  young.  The  '  green 
ears'  of  youthful  devotion  will  naturally 
be  ;oll<!v.»'ii  by  the  ripened  sheaves  of  a 


30 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


godly  old  age,  and  in  this  form  gathered 
into  the  garners  of  eternal  life. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE    PEACE-OFFERING. 

Pursuing  llie  scriptural  order  of  the 
specified  oflerings  under  the  law,  we 
come  in  the  present  chapter  to  that 
wliich  is  denominated  the  Peace-ofFer- 
ing.  Tlio  Heb.  term  thus  rendered  is 
w"'^V-  shelJmim,  from  the  root  0^^-13 
shulam.  to  viake  up,  make  good,  restore, 
repay  ;  and  thence  to  make  up  a  differ- 
ence, to  eff'ect  a  reconciliation,  to  be  at 
peace-  'Vhe  leading  ideas,  therefore, 
cniive\cd  hy  the  term,  are  those  either 
ol'  retribution  or  o[ peace  ;  and  the  term 
peace  in  the  Scripture  generally  denotes 
either  the  mutual  concord  of  friends, 
OT  a  state  of  prosperity.  These  different 
senses  assigned  to  the  root  have  led  to 
different  exj.ositions  of  the  appellation 
derived  from  it.  On  the  one  hand,  it  is 
held,  that  the  idea  of  retribution,  or 
recompence,  is  prominent  in  the  name 
given  to  this  class  of  sacrifices,  and  that 
it  indicates  the  divi^iion  or  distribution 
made  of  them  into  three  parts,  one  for 
God,  one  for  tlie  offerers,  and  one  for 
the  priests.  This  opinion  is  maintained 
by  tlie  author  of  a  Jewish  treatise  en- 
tilled  J<"l£D  Siphra,  who  says,  *  they 
were  so  called  because  a  prescribed 
portion  of  them  fell  to  the  share  of  each 
party.'  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  held 
by  some,  that  the  other  sense  of  the 
rcot,  namely,  that  of  concord  is  domi- 
nant m  the  derivative,  and  that  the 
name  of  these  oblations  denotes  their 
being  symbols  of  friendship  between 
God,  the  priests,  and  the  offerers,  to 
each  of  whom  was  allotted  a  certain 
portion  of  them.  The  opinion,  how- 
ever, is  more  simple  and  natural  and 
therefore  more  probable,  which  regards 
the  combined  ideas  of  prosperity  and 
retribution  or  requital  hs  prominent  in 
the  term,  and  that  this  class  of  offerings 
is  so  called  because  they  were  always 
presented  in  reference  to  a  prosperous 


state  of  affairs,  either  obtained  and 
gratefully  acknowledged,  or  supplicat- 
ed. A  '  sacrifice  of  peace-offerings' 
therefore  is  properly  a  '  sacrifice  of  pay- 
offerings,  of  requitals,  of  retributions, 
or  pacifications,'  and  was  offered  (1.) 
Upon  the  recovery  of  peace  with  God  in 
consequence  of  an  expiation  for  some 
sin  committed ;  Hos.  14.  2.  (2.)  As 
an  expression  of  thanksgiving  lor  mer- 
cies received  ;  Lev.  7.  12.  Judg.  20. 26. 
I  Chron,  21.  26.  (3.)  On  the  perform- 
ance of  a  vow,  as  Ps.  56.  13,  '  Tliy  vows 
are  upon  me,  0  God;  I  will  render 
praises  (Heb.  *  will  repay  confessions  ') 
unto  thee.'  Prov.  7.  14,  '  I  have  peace- 
offerings  with  me  (Heb.  '  peace-offer- 
ings are  (were)  upon  me,'  i.  e.  the  obli- 
gallon  of  peace-offerings)  ;  this  day 
have  I  paid  my  vows  ;'  this  kind  of 
peace-offering  being  vowed  on  condition 
that  a  particular  mercy  were  bestowed, 
was  performed  after  the  condition  was 
granted.  By  the  Gr.  the  original  word 
IS  rendered  here  and  elsewhere  dvaia 
(jWTrjpiov  sacrifice  of  salvation,  (or  safe- 
ty)  ;  though  sometimes  by  eiprivfiKt)  a 
pacifying  or  peace-offering^  and  by 
the  Chal.  a  '  a  sacrifice  of  sanctities  (or 
sanctifications),'  probably  because  none 
but  clean  and  sanctified  persons  were 
permitted  to  eat  of  it ;  Lev.  7.  19,  20. 
Sol.  Jarchij  a  Jewish  Commentator, 
says  they  are  called  peace-off'erings, 
'  because  they  bring  peace  into  the 
world,  and  because  by  them  there  is 
peace  to  the  altar,  to  the  priests,  and 
to  the  owners.'  This,  however,  is  ra- 
ther the  effect  of  the  expiatory  than  of 
the  eucliarislic  offerings.  Yet  it  is  re- 
markable that  as  these  sacrifices  re- 
ceived their  original  appellation  from 
tlieir  being  offered  in  thanksgiving  or 
supplication  for  prosperity,  so  because 
they  were  employed  by  the  offerers 
themselves  in  sacred  feasts,  they  were 
also  very  frequently  designated  by  ano- 
ther  name  ti'^riDT  zeba'liim,  wiiich  is 
the  appropriate  term  for  victims  slaugh- 
tered for  sacrifices  and  for  banquets. 


B.  C.  1490.3 


CHAPTER  III. 


31 


Yet  this  is  plainly  a  metaphorical  sense 
of  the  term,  by  which  we  are  in  no  dan- 
ger of  being  misled.  From  their  being 
^jriivcipally  consumed  by  llie  offerers  at 
tlie  feast  that  followed  the  oblation, 
Michaelis,  Bootliroyd,  and  others,  pre- 
Ci-r  to  translate  the  term  *  feast-sacri- 
fice' rather  than  '  peace-ofFering;'  while 
others  iigaia  -choose  to  render  the  ori- 
ginal '  lliunk-oitering.'  But  we  deem 
it  best  to  give  the  uiost  literal  render- 
ing and  supjily  all  deficiencies  by  the 
re|uisile  explanations. 

-»s  intimated  above,  the  Peace-offer- 
iiit;s  wfie  of  a  threefold  character,  vol- 
tiiit<iry,  votive,  and  eiicharistic.  The 
i  is|  ol  ihese  was  offered  in  view  of  spe- 
ci  1  favors  and  blessings  enjoyed;  tlie 
two  former  for  mercies  desired  and  im- 
tilored.  Eh  Lev.  7.  11,  12,  the  Peace- 
offering  is  evidently  regarded  as  an  act 
<if  thanksgiving  for  mercies  received, 
and  as  such  is  referred  to  by  David,  Ps. 
101.  22,  ^  Lot  them  sacrijice  the  sacri- 
fices of  thanksgiving  (nTiri  *^nit  "nlT'^ 
yizbe'hu  zih'h'c  todih),  and  declare  his 
works  with  rejoicing.'  So  also  Ps.  116. 
13,  17,  *  0  Lord,  truly  I  am  thy  ser- 
vant, 1  am  thy  servant,  and  the  son  of 
thine  handmaid  ;  thou  hast  loosed  my 
bonds,  I  will  offer  to  thee  the  sacri- 
fice of  thanksgiving  (niiri  rCt  z'iba^h 
tod'th),  and  will  call  upon  the  name  of 
the  Lord.'  Hence  it  was  that  Heze- 
kiah,  2  Chron.  29.  20,  after  having  abol- 
ished all  idolatrous  rites,  and  restored 
the  ancient  worship,  directed  eucha- 
ristic  sacrifices  to  be  offered.  Such  too, 
it  is  evident,  were  offered  by  Manasseh, 
2  Chron.  33.  16,  after  his  restoration  to 
i)is  country  and  kingdom.  The  general 
<Ioctrine  held  by  the  Jews  in  respect  to 
tliis  kind  of  oblations  is  thus  expressed 
by  Aben  Ezra  ;  '  The  design  of  an  eu- 
charistic  sacrifice  is,  that  any  person 
delivered  from  trouble  may  give  praise 
to  God  on  account  of  it.'  iiquivalent 
to  this  is  the  language  of  Sol.  Jarclii ; 
'  An  eucharistic  sacrifice  ought  to  be 
offered  to  God  by  every  one  who  has  ex- 
perienced  any  thing  like  a  miracle  j  who  j 


I  has  sailed  over  the  ocean,  or  traveled 
j  through  c'.?scrts  ;  who  has  been  deliver- 
j  cd  from  prison,  or  recovered  from  dis. 
ease  ;   for  they  are  under  the  greatest 
j  obligations  to  praise  God.'     Allusions 
I  also  to  the  Peace-offering  as  a  cotive  or 
voluntary  oblation  occur  in  the  follow- 
I  ing  passages,  from  which  it  will  appear 
J  that  such  offerings  were  generally  vowed 
I  in  times   of  danger  and  distress.    Joe. 
i  2.  9,  <  I  will  sacrifice  unto  thee  with  the 
I  voice  of  tlianksgiving,  I  will  pay  that  I 
I  have  vowed  ;  salvation  is  of  the  Lord.' 
2  Sam.  15.  8, '  For  thy  servant  vowed  a 
vow  while  I  abode  at  Geshur,  in  Syria, 
saying,  if  the  Lord  shall  bring  me  again 
indeed   to  Jerusalem,  then  I  will  serve 
the  Lord  ;'  i.  e.  will  serve  him  with  a 
peace  or  thank-offering.     One    of  the 
most    striking  instances  of  this    kind 
occurs  in  the  case  of  the  eleven  tribes, 
Judg.  20,  2Q^  who  from  a  zeal  of  God's 
j  house    had   undertaken   to  punish   the 
j  Benjamites  for  the  horrible  wickedness 
j  they  had   committed.     Twice  had  the 
j  confederate  tribes  gone  up  against  the 
j  Benjamites,   and   twice    been  repulsed 
i  with  the  loss  of  twenty  thousand  men. 
j  But  being  still  desirous  to  know  and  do 
the  will  of  God  in  this  matter,  as  it  was 
his  quarrel  only  that  they  were  aveng- 
ing, '  they  went  up  to  the  house  of  God 
and  wept    and   fasted  until  even,  and 
offered  burnt-offerings  and  peace-offer- 
ings unto  the  Lord  ;'  and  thus  God  de- 
livered the  Benjamites  into  their  hands, 
so  that  with  the  exception  of  si.x  huR- 
dred  only,  who  fled,  the  whole  tribe  of 
Benjamin,  male  and  females,  was  ex- 
tirpated.    So  Jacob,  Gen.  2S.  20-22,  and 
Jephthah,  Judg.  30.  31  ;  and  so  David, 
Ps.  QQ.  13,  14,  '  I  will  pay  tliee  my  vows, 
which   my  lips  have  uttered,  and   my 
mouth    hath    spoken  when   I  was    in 
trouble.'     From  this  it  appears  that  this 
kind  of  sacrifices  was  very  ancient,  and 
was  grafted  upon  that  innate  desire  to 
testify  a  mind  grateful  for  divine  bene, 
fits,  the  traces  of  which  are  discoverable 
in  all  ages  and  all  nations. 

The   material  of  the  Peace-offering 


32 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


was  to  be  either  of  the  herd  or  the  flock, 
the  greater  or  lesser  animals,  but  never 
of  the  fowl,  probably  because  their 
diminutive  size  did  not  admit  of  the 
three-fold  division  between  God,  the 
priest,  and  the  people.  Like  the  holo- 
caustic  ofFerings,  it  must  be  without 
blemish ;  but  unlike  to  them,  it  might 
be  either  male  or  female.  Of  the  rites 
and  ceremonies  pertaining  to  the  obla- 
tion, gome  were  in  common  with  the 
other  sacrifices,  and  some  peculiar  to 
itself.  It  must  be  brought  to  the  door 
of  the  tabernacle  •  the  owner  must  lay 
his  hand  on  it ;  it  must  be  killed,  and 
the  blood  shed  and  sprinkled  on  the  altar 
round  about;  and  finally  it  must  be 
burnt  upon  the  altar,  except  the  reserved 
parts.  In  these  respects  the  details  of 
the  oblation  are  very  similar  to  those 
of  the  burnt-ofiering.  But  peculiar  to 
itself  was  the  division  of  the  offering 
into  three  parts — the  limitation  of  the 
time  for  eating  it — the  addition  of  leaven 
— and  the  prohibition  of  fat  and  blood  ; 
each  of  which  particulars  will  be  duly 
considered  in  its  proper  place. 

The  victim  of  the  Peace-offering  was 
to  be  divided  between  God,  and  the 
priest,  and  the  people  ,-  to  each  a  por- 
tion. The  part  to  be  burnt '  before  the 
Lord  upon  the  altar,  upon  the  burnt- 
oflfering,' consisted  of  all  the  suet  per- 
taining to  the  inwards,  the  two  kidneys, 
the  caul  iipon  the  liver,  and  all  the  fat. 
This  was  the  Lord's  portion.  Another 
was  assigned  to  the  priest.  This  con- 
sisted of  the  breast  and  the  right 
shoulder.  The  breast  was  to  be  waved 
to  and  fro,  and  the  shoulder  was  to  be 
heaved  upwards  before  the  Lord,  in 
token  of  their  being  appropriated  to  his 
house  and  service.  The  breast  was 
then  given  to  the  priests  in  general, 
while  the  shoulder  remained  the  per- 
quisite of  him  who  officiated.  A  por- 
tion also  of  the  leavened  bread  was  to 
be  given  to  the  priest.  All  the  remain- 
der of  the  oblation,  which  was  by  far 
the  greatest  part,  belonged  to  the  ofiTer- 
er  himself,  and  was  to  he  eaten  by  liim- 


self  and  his  family  and  friends,  if  cere- 
monially clean,  as  a  social  and  hospita- 
ble meal.  If  the  Peace-oflfering  were 
of  the  eucharistic  class,  it  was  to  be 
eaten  the  same  day  it  was  offered,  and 
none  of  it  was  to  be  left  until  the  morn- 
ing. But  if  the  sacrifice  of  the  offering 
were  a  vow  or  a  voluntary  offering,  part 
of  it  might  be  eaten  on  the  day  on 
which  it  was  offered,  and  part  of  it  on 
the  next  day;  but  if  any  of  it  remained 
unto  the  third  day^  that  part  must  not 
be  eaten,  but  must  be  burnt  with  fire. 
The  reason  of  the  difference  in  the  two 
cases  is  perhaps  this  :  the  tribute  of 
love  and  gratitude  was  far  more  pleas- 
ing  to  God,  as  arguing  a  more  heavenly 
frame  of  mind.  In  consequence  of  its 
superior  excellence  the  sacrifice  that 
was  offered  as  a  thanksgiving  must  be 
eaten  on  the  same  day  ;  whereas  the 
sacrifice  offered  as  a  vow  or  voluntary 
offering  might,  being  less  holy  and  ac- 
ceptable, be  eaten  also  on  the  second 
day. 

As  to  the  occasions  on  which  the 
Peace-offerings  were  presented,  some 
of  them  were  fixed  by  divine  appoint- 
ment, and  some  were  altogether  op' 
tional.  The  fixed  occasions  were  at 
the  consecration  of  the  priests,  Ex.  St). 
28  ;  at  the  expiration  of  the  Nazarite's 
vow,  Num.  6.  14  ;  at  the  dedication  of 
the  tabernacle  and  temple,  Num.  7. 17  ; 
and  at  the  feast  of  first-fruits.  Lev.  23, 
19.  In  addition  to  these,  the  people 
were  at  liberty  to  offer  them  whenever 
a  sense  of  gratitude  or  of  need  inclined 
them  to  it.  It  is  to  occasions  of  this 
kind  that  the  directions  in  the  present 
chapter  mainly  have  respect. 

Having  thus  explained  the  nature  of 
the  Peace-offering,  and  the  various  rites 
and  ceremonies  connected  with  it,  it 
remains  to  advert  briefly  to  the  moral 
lessons  which  it  was  calculated  to  im- 
part. And  in  the  outset  we  may  re- 
mark, that  the  rendering  of  the  original 
adopted  in  our  version  suggests  the  idea 
of  a  pacifying  effect  as  wrought  by  this 
:^peci^■s  of  sacrifice,  which  is  to  be  allrib- 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  III. 


33 


A 


CHAPTER  HI. 
ND  if  his  oblation  ^e  a  a  sacri- 
fice of  peace-offering,  if  he 

=1  ch.  7.  11,  29.  and  22.  21. 


uted  ratlier  to  the  olher  class  of  offer- 
ings, whose  scope  was  more  distinctly 
expiatory.  Th-;  word  peace  has  a  dif- 
ferent shade  of  meaning  in  the  Hebrew 
from  what  it  has  in  our  language.  With 
us  it  suggests  most  naturally  and  legiii- 
mately  the  idea  of  reconciliation,  the 
bringing  into  concord  contending  far- 
ties, — an  idea  which  is  more  properly 
to  be  associated  willi  the  effects  of  the 
stated  burnt-offoring,  or  the  occasional 
sin  and  trespass-offering.  In  the  He- 
brew  the  import  of  prosperity,  of  wel- 
fare, is  predominant  to  the  enjoyment 
or  the  petition  of  which  this  offering 
was  especially  appointed.  The  idea  of 
grateful  acknowledgment  therefore  is 
the  leading  idea  wliich  it  is  calculated 
to  suggest.  But  with  what  expressive 
ceremonies  was  this  service  marked  ! 
How  strongly  would  it  tend  to  infuse 
the  spirit  of  a  son  and  of  a  friend  into 
the  heart  of  the  worshipper.  How  em- 
phatically would  he  be  reminded  of  the 
blessed  privileges  which  he  enjoyed 
through  his  sacrifice.  Partaking  of  the 
same  viands  was  ever  considered  as  the 
bond  and  proof  of  friendship  and  peace  ; 
and  here  ihe  Lord,  his  ])riests,  and  the 
offerer  himself,  all  partook  of  the  same 
offerings.  They  sat  down  together  as 
it  were  at  the  same  table.  In  this  rite 
accordingly  the  Jew  would  read  a  happy 
assurance  of  the  divine  favor  towards 
him.  As  he  feasted  with  his  family 
and  friends  on  the  portion  assigned  him 
from  the  altar,  he  would  enjoy  a  peace 
in  his  own  soul  from  this  instituted 
token  of  reconciliation  and  friendship. 
The  whole  ceremony  was  eminently 
calculated  to  produce  all  the  emotions 
appropriate  to  his  condition.  As  he 
brought  his  offering  to  the  altar,  he 
would  think  of  the  great  mercy  and 
condescension  of  God  in  thus  providing 
a  way  of  acceptance  for  him,  and  ad. 


offer  it  of  the  herd,  whether  it  he 
a  male  or  female;  he  shall  offer  it 
^without  blemish  before  the  Lord. 

b  ch.  1.  3 


milling  liim  to  his  own  friendship  and 
love.  He  would  feel  deep  abasement 
for  the  alienation  and  disaffection  which 
appeared  in  his  own  heart.  As  he  laid 
his  hand  on  the  animal's  head,  and  as 
he  saw  its  blood  streaming  at  his  feet, 
he  would  think  of  his  own  utter  unwor- 
thiness  to  appear  before  God,  and  he 
would  be  affected  to  think  that  lie  owed 
all  his  permission  to  approach  him  to 
the  sufferings  of  another  in  his  stead. 
As  he  saw  the  smoke  of  the  fat  ascend 
to  heaven,  he  would  rejoice  in  this  ac- 
ceptance of  his  offering.  When  he 
looked  upon  the  waved  breast  and  the 
uplifted  shoulder,  he  would  be  thankful 
for  the  ministry  of  the  appointed  serv- 
ants of  the  Most  High,  and  when  he 
retired  from  the  ceremony  he  would  go 
on  his  way  rejoicing  that  the  Lord  had 
accepted  him  in  his  work,  and  would 
eat  his  food  with  all  the  warmest  emo- 
tions of  gratitude,  affiance,  and  love. 
Such  would  be  the  legitimate  influence 
of  a  ceremony  of  this  nature  upon  the 
heart  of  every  pious  Jew.  It  would  be 
one  of  his  most  privileged  feasts,  though 
but  a  private  one,  and  would  throw  a 
peaceful  and  hajipy  frame  over  the 
whole  soul.  Thus  the  evangelical  doc- 
trines were  presented  to  him,  and  all 
those  right  feelings  towards  God,  which 
are  so  powerfully  called  forth  by  the 
gospel,  were  in  a  measure  according 
with  his  light  experienced  by  a  Jev/. 

The  Peace-offering  of  the  Herd. 

1  Ifhia  oblation.  Heb.  i:nip  korba- 
no,  his  korban  or  gift,  as  usual  in  this 
connection  wherever  'offering'  or 
*  oblation  '  occurs  in  our  version.     Gr. 

TO     6o}pOV  aVTOV    T(0    K.VpU;J,   htS    gift  tO  tkC 

Lord.  In  like  manner  we  find  '  korban' 
explained  as  a  gift  by  the  Evangelist, 

Mark  7.  1 1 . ^  Male  or  female.    In 

this  respect  the  peace-offering  differed 


34 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


2  And  che  shall  lay  his  hand  upon 
the  head  of  his  offering,  and  kill  it 
at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation  :  and  Aaron's  sons 
the  priests  shall  sprinkle  the  blood 
upon  the  altar  round  about. 

o  And  he  shall  offer  of  the  sacri- 
fice of  the  peace-offering,  an  offer- 
ing made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord  ; 
dthe  fat  that  coverelh  the  inwards, 

c  ch.  1.  4,  5.  Exod.  29.  10.  ^  Exod.  29. 
13,22.     ch.  4.  8,  9. 

from  the  holocaust,  or  whole  burnt- 
offering,  in  which  a  male  only  was 
allowed. 

2.  Shall  lay  his  hand.  The  imposi- 
tion of  hands  in  this  case  differed  Irom 
the  same  ceremony  in  the  sacrifice  of 
the  holocaust  in  this,  that  over  the  head 
of  the  peace-offering  there  was  no  con- 
fession of  sins,  but  merely  the  uttering 

of  praise  and  supplication  to  God. 

IT  And  kill  it  at  the  door,  ^-c.  That  is 
the  priest  or  some  other  Levitc  shall 
kill  it.  So  also  v.  S.  See  note  on  Lev. 
1.0.  As  this  olfering  belonged  to  what 
were  termed  the  lesser  or  lighter  holy 
things,  it  was  not  required  to  be  offered, 
like  the  burnt-offering  or  the  sin-offer- 
ing, on  the  north  side  of  the  altar,  but 
in  any  place  of  the  court.     Lev.  L  IL 

IT  And  Aaron's  sons  shall  sprinkle. 

This  was  to  be  done  according  to  the 
manner  prescribed,  Lev.  L  5.  '  For  the 
burnt-offering,'  says  Maimonides,  '  the 
trespass-offering,  and  the  peace-offering, 
the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  these 
three  upon  the  altar  w-as  ever  alike.' 
It  was  obviously  a  type  of  the  sprink- 
ling of  Christ's  blood,  whereby  we,  our 
words  and  works  are  sanctified  before 
God.     1  Pet.  1.2,     Heb.  12.  14. 

3.  Shall  offer  of  the  sacrifice.  Heb. 
niT?3  mizzeba'h.  That  is,  part  of  the 
peace-ofiering  ;  for  of  this  sacrifice  one 
part,  viz.  the  fat  pieces,  the  kidneys, 
the  caul,  &c.,  was  to  be  burnt ;  a  second, 
consisting  of  the  breast  and  the  right 
shoulder,  was  reserved  for  the  priest ; 
while  all  the  remainder  was  appropriat* 


and  all  the  fat  that  is  upon  the  in- 
wards, 

4  And  the  two  kidneys,  and  the 
fat  that  is  on  them,  which  is  by  the 

j  flanks,  and  the  caul  above  the  liv- 
er, with  the  kidneys,  it  shall  he 
take  away. 

!  5  And  Aaron's  sons  eshall  burn  it 
on  the  altar,  upon  the  burnt-sacri- 
fice, which  IS  upon  the  wood,  that 

f  ch.  6.  12.     Exod.  29.  13. 

cd  to  the  offerer,  to  be  eaten  by  him,  his 
family  and  friends,  in  a  sacrificial  least. 

IT  The  fat  that  covereth  the  innards. 

Frequently  termed  with  us  '  the  suet.' 
This  was  always  burned  upon  the  iiltar, 
j  and  would  naturally  serve  to  feed  the 
j  fire.  See  a  fuller  explanation  in  the 
I  Note  on  Ex.  29.  13.  The  design  of  this 
j  part  of  the  ceremony  may  be  understood 
in  either  of  the  w:iys  following.  (1.)  As 
j  the  *  fat'  of  any  thing  is  sometimes  but 
another  name  for  its  best  or  choicest 
part  (see  Note  on  Gen.  4.  4),  and  as  the 
'  fat '  was  deemed  the  most  valuable 
part  of  the  animal,  it  was  offered  in 
preference  to  all  other  parts,  implying 
that  the  best  of  every  thing  was  to  be 
offered  to  God.  (2.)  As,  however,  the 
term  is  used  in  other  cases  to  denote  the 
dullness,  hardness,  and  unbelief  of  the 
heart,  Ps.  1I9.  70.  Acts  2S.  27,  it  may 
here  signify  the  consuming  of  our  cor- 
ruptions by  the  fire  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
The  '  kidneys  '  also,  the  supposed  seat 
of  some  of  the  strongest  of  the  sensual 
propensities,  were  burnt  probably  to 
teach  the  duty  of  the  mortification  of 
our  members  which  are  upon  earth,  for- 
nication, uncleanness,  inordinate  affec- 
lion,  &c.    Col.  3.  5 

4.  The  caul  above  the  liver.    See  note 

on  Ex.  29.  13. IT   Which  is  by  the 

flanks.  Heb.  f^^DS  keselim,  loins. 
Gr.  and  Chal.  '  Which  is  on  the  thighs.' 
Comp.  Job  15.  27,  '  He  coverelh  his  face 
with  his  fatness,  and  maketh  collops  of 
fat  on  his  flanks.  (^DS  kesel.)' 

5.  Upon  the  burnt-sacrifice.     That  is, 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  III. 


36 


is  on  the  fire  :  it  is  an  offering 
made  by  fire,  of  a  sweet,  savour 
unto  the  Lord. 

6  H  And  if  his  offering  for  a  sa- 
crifice of  peace-offering  unto  the 
Lord  be  of  the  flock,  male  or  fe- 
male; fhe  shall  offer  it  without 
blemish. 

7  If  Jie  offer  a  Iamb  for  his  offer- 
ing, then  shall  he  offer  it  before 
the  Lord. 

8  And  he  shall  lay  his  hand  upon 

f  ver.  1,  &c. 


in  addition  to  the  burnt-offering,  laying 
it  on  the  altar  after  tlie  daily  offering 
of  the  lamb,  which  always  had  the  pre- 
cedency. 

The  Peace-offering  of  the  Flock. — 1.  A 
Lamb. 

6.  If  his  offering be  of  the  flock. 

That  is,  of  sheep  or  goats,  which 
are  both  included  under  the  term  flock. 
'  Peace-offerings,'  says  IVIaimonides, 
'are  brouglit  of  shee.p,  of  goats,  and  of 
beeves,  male  or  female,  and  great  or 
small  ;  but  no  fowl  is  brouglit  for  a 
peace-offering.'  The  reason  of  this  ex- 
ception was  that  fowls  had  not  fat 
enough  to  be  burnt  upon  the  altar. 

9.  The  whole  rump.  Heb.  .T'^JStn 
n>3'^?2n  hualyah  temimah^the  perfect  or 
entire  tail.  '  Dr.  Boolhroyd  renders, 
more  distinctly  : — '  The  large  fiit  tail 
entire,  taken  off  close  to  the  rump.'  It 
might  seem  exlraordmary  that  the  tail 
of  a  sheep  (only  of  a  slieep)  should  be 
pointed  out  with  so  much  care  as  a  suit- 
able offering  upon  God's  altar,  were  it 
not  distinctly  understood  what  sheep 
and  what  tail  is  intended.  The  direc- 
tion indicates  that  the  fat-tailed  species 
were  usually  offered  in  sacrifice,  if  ihe 
flocks  of  the  Hebrews  were  not  wholly 
composed  of  tliem.  This  species  is 
particularly  abundant  in  Syria  and  Pal- 
estine, equalling  or  outnumbering  the 
common  Bedouin  species.  Even  the 
latter,  although  in  other  respects  much 


the  head  of  his  offering,  and  kill  it 
before  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation :  and  Aaron's  sons  shall 
sprinkle  the  blood  thereof  round 
about  upon  the  altar. 

9  And  he  shall  offer  of  the  sacri- 
fice of  the  peace-offering  an  offer- 
ing made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord: 
the  fat  thereof,  and  the  whole 
rump,  (it  shall  he  take  off  hard  by 
the  back-bone ;)  and  the  fat  that 
covereth  the  inwards,  and  all  the 
fat  that  is  upon  the  inwards, 

resembling  the  common  English  sheep, 
is  distinguished  by  a  larger  and  thicker 
tail  than  any  British  species  possesses. 
But  the  tail  of  the  species  peculiarly 
called  'fat-tailed,'  seems  to  exceed  all 
reasonable  bounds,  and  has  attracted 
the  attention  of  all  travelers  from  the 
times  of  Herodotus  to  our  own.  These 
tails,  or  rather  tails  loaded  on  each  side 
with  enormous  masses  of  fat,  are  often 
one-fourth  the  weight  of  the  whole  car- 
cass, when  divested  of  the  head,  intes- 
tines, and  skin.  The  tails  seem  to  at- 
tain the  largest  size  in  the  countries 
with  which  the  Hebrews  were  most 
conversant ;  for  in  countries  more  east- 
ward we  never  saw  them  quite  so  large 
as  the  largest  of  those  described  by  Dr. 
Russell  in  his  '  Natural  History  of 
Aleppo.'  He  says  that  a  common 
sheep  of  this  sort  weighs,  without  the 
offal,  sixty  or  seventy  pounds,  of  which 
the  tail  usually  weighs  fifty  or  upwards  j 
but  he  adds,  that  such  as  are  of  the 
largest  breed  and  have  been  fattened, 
will  sometimes  weigh  150  lbs.,  the  tails 
being  50  lbs.  These  last  very  large 
sheep  are  kept  in  yards  wdiere  they  are 
in  no  danger  of  injuring  their  tails  ;  but 
in  some  other  places  where  they  feed 
in  the  fields,  the  shepherds  sometimes 
afiix  a  thin  piece  of  board  to  the  under 
part  of  the  tail,  to  prevent  its  being  tora 
by  bushes  and  thickets,  as  it  is  not 
covered  underneath  with  thick  wool 
like  the  upper  part.     Sometimes  the- 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


10  And  the  two  kidneys,  and  the 
fat  that  25  upon  them,  which  is 
by  the  flanks,  and  the  caul  above 
the  liver,  with  the  kidneys,  it  shall 
he  take  away. 

11  And  the  priest  shall  burn  it 
upon  the  altar:  it  is  gthe  food  of 
the  offering  made  by  fire  unto  the 

L0)^D. 

12  ^1  And  if  his  offering  be  a 
goat,  then  i^lie  shall  offer  it  before 
the  Lord. 

13  And  he  shall  lay  his  hand  upon 
the  head  of  it,  and  kill  it  before  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation  : 
and  the  sons  of  Aaron  shall  sprin- 
kle the  blood  thereof  upon  the 
altar  round  about. 

14  And  he  shall  offer  thereof  his 

g  See  ch.  21.  6,  S,  17,  21,  22.  and  22.  25. 
Ezek.  44.  7.     Mai.  1.  7,  12.     ^  ver.  1.  7-  &c. 

board  is  furnished  with  small  wheels, 
to  enable  the  sheep  to  drag  it  along  the 
more  easily.  The  mutton  of  these 
sheep  is  very  good,  and  the  fat  of  the 
tail  is  the  most  grateful  animal  fat  the 
writer  ever  tasted.  It  is  rich  and  mar- 
rowy, and  is  never  eaten  alone,  but  is 
mixed  up  in  many  dishes  with  lean 
meat,  and  is  in  various  ways  employed 
as  a  substitute  for  butter  and  oil.  The 
standing  Oriental  dish,  boiled  rice,  is 
peculiarly  palatable  when  lubricated 
with  fat  from  the  tail  of  this  remarka- 
ble species  of  sheep.  Viewed  in  its 
various  applications,  the  tail  is  an  ar- 
ticle of  great  use  and  delicacy,  and 
could  be  no  unworthy  offering.' — Pict. 
Bib. 

11.  It  is  the  food  of  the  offering,  ^-c. 
We  have  before  remarked,  in  speaking 
of  the  general  object  of  the  altar,  that 
the  sacrifices  ofiered  upon  it  were  ac- 
counted, in  a  sense, the  provisions  of 
God's  table,  the  viands  upon  wliich  he 
feasted.  See  Mai.  1.  12.  Such  offer- 
mgs  are  here  called  his  '  broad,'  or 
*  food,'  and  the  phraseology  occurs  also 
Num.  28.  2  Ezek.  44.  7.  and  in  Lev.  21. : 


I  offering,  even  an  offering  made  by 
j  fire  unto  the  Lord;    the  fat  that 

covereth  the  inwards,  and  all  the 
!  fat  that  is  upon  the  inwards, 
I  15  And  the  two  kidneys,  and  the 
j  fat  that  is  upon  I  hem,  which  is  by 
i  the  flanks,  and  the  caul  above  the 
'  liver,  with  the  kidneys,  it  shall  he 
I  take  away. 

j  16  And  the  priest  shall  burn  them 
j  upon  the  altar:  it  is  the  food  of 
I  the  offering  made  by  fire  for  a  sweet 

savour:  'all  the  fat  z5  the  Lord's. 
17  It  shall  be  a  ^perpetual  statute 

for  your  generations  throughout  all 

your  dwellings,  that  ye  eat  neither 

ifat  nor  ^blood. 

i  ch.  7.  23,  25.  1  Sam.  2.  15.  2  Chron.  7. 
7.  ^  ch  6.  IS.  and  7.  36.  and  17.  7.  and  23. 
14.  '  ver.  16.  compare  with  Deut,  32.  14. 
Neh.  8.  10.  "■  Gen  9.  4.  ch.  7.  23,  26  and 
17.  10,  14.  Deut.  12.  16.  1  Sam.  14.  33. 
Ezek-  44.  7,  15. 


6,  S,  17,  the  priests  who  burnt  them  are 
expressly  said  to  offer  '  the  bread  of 
their  God.'  The  use  of  this  language 
represented  in  a  striking  manner  the 
fact  that  God  dwelt,  and,  as  it  were, 
kept  house  among  them,  and  that  those 
who  partook  with  him  of  these  sacri- 
fices, were  entertained  as  guests  at  his 
table. 

The  Peace-offering  of  the  Flock.— 2.  A 
Goat. 

12.  If  his  offering  be  a  goat.  The 
law  concerning  this  offering  coincides 
entirely  with  the  preceding  respecting 
the  lamb,  except  in  what  relates  to  the 
rump  or  tail,  so  that  this  section  requires 
very  little  commentary. 

14.  He  shall  offer  thereof.  That  is, 
a  part  of  it,  the  part  which  he  imme- 
diately goes  on  to  specify,  viz.  the  fat, 
the  kidneys,  the  caul,  &c. 

17.  That  ye  cat  neither  fat  nor  blood. 
This  jjrohibition  respecting  the  eating 
of  fat,  is  to  be  understood  of  the  fat  of 
such  animals  as  were  offered  to  God  in 
sacrifice,  and  not  of  others,  although  the 
Jews,  we  believe,  interpret  it  of  all  fat, 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  IV. 


37 


wuhout  exception.  But  the  contrary  is 
to  be  gathered  from  Lev.  7.  2,  '  Ye  shall 
eai  of  no  manner  of  fat  of  ox,  or  of 
tlietp,  or  of  goat ;'  implying  that  the 
lat  of  other  animals  might  be  eaten. 
As  10  blood  J  however,  the  probability  is, 
although  the  Rabbinical  writers  main- 
tain tliat  that  of  locusts,  iishes,  &c.  was 
Uvvfiil,  that  it  was  intended  to  be  uni- 
versally forbidden.  The  prohibition  in 
(ien.  9.  4,  is  absolute  and  unqualified  j 
*  Flesli  with  the  biood  thereof  shall  ye 
not  eat.'  The  reasons  of  the  prohibition 
doubtless  were,  (1.)  To  put  a  diiference 
between  the  chosen  peo}».le  and  Gentile 
idolaters,  who  used  to  drink  the  blood 
of  their  sacrifices;  Ps.  \Q.  4,  'Their 
sorrows  shall  be  multiplied  that  hasten 
after  another  God  :  tlieir  drink-offer- 
ings of  blood  will  I  not  otler.'  (2.)  To 
restrain  any  tendency  to  the  acquisition 
of  a  cruel  and  sanguinary  disposition. 
(3.)  To  inspire  respect  and  reverence 
for  that  which  was  intended  to  represent 
the  precious  blood  of  Christ,  in  which 
the  virtue  of  his  atonement  was  to  con- 
sist. 

PvEMARKS. — (].)  As  the  highest  re- 
compense which  God  requires  for  his 
benefits  towards  us  is  the  tribute  of  a 
grateful  heart,  he  that  withholds  this 
clearly  proves  himself  unworthy  of  the 
least  of  heaven's  mercies. 

(1.)  A  cordial  thank-offering  to  God 
should  ever  follow  the  attainment  of 
any  lawful  object  upon  which  our  hearts 
have  been  set. 

(2.)  How  kindly  are  we  exempted 
from  the  legal  burdens  of  the  Jews  !  li' 
they  wished  to  express  their  humilia- 
tion or  gratitude,  it  was  at  the  expense 
of  a  part  of  their  property,  yielded  up 
to  God  by  way  of  sacrifice.  No  such 
necessity  is  imposed  upon  us.  God 
hath  not  made  us  '  to  serve  with  an 
offering,  nor  wearied  us  with  incense.' 
It  is  the  offering  of  a  Iree  heart,  or  of  a 
'  broken  and  contrite  spirit,'  that  he 
desires  of  us,  and  that  he  will  accept  in 
preference  to  *  the  cattle  upon  a  thou- 


sand hills.'  All  that  remains  for  us  is 
to  say,  '  Accept,  I  beseech  thee,  the 
free-will  offerings  of  my  mouth.'  If 
we  withhold  those,  well  may  we  fear 
that  every  beast  that  was  ever  slaugh- 
tered on  these  occasions,  and  every  por- 
tion ever  offered,  will  appear  in  judg- 
ment against  us,  to  condemn  our  ingra- 
titude and  obduracy  ! 

(5.)  '  Shall  burn  it  on  the  altar,  upon 
the  burnt-sacrifice.'  The  Peace-offer- 
ing, whether  presented  in  a  way  of 
thanksgiving  or  supplication,  equally 
began  with  a  sacrifice  in  the  way  of 
atonement.  Thus,  whatever  be  the 
irame  of  our  minds,  and  whatever  ser- 
vice v/e  render  unto  God,  we  are  inva- 
riably to  fix  our  thoughts  on  the  atone- 
ment of  Christ,  as  the  only  means 
whereby  our  persons  or  our  services  can 
find  acceptance  with  God. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE    SIN-OFFERING. 

The  Jewish  law  prescribed  two  kinds 
of  piacular  sacrifices  distinguished  in 
our  language  by  the  appellations  Sin- 
offering  and  Trespass-offering — terms 
which,  though  not  adequately  express- 
ing the  force  (»f  the  original  words,  we 
are  obliged  to  retain  for  the  want  of 
belter.  The  original  for  Sin-offering 
is  nitt2n  hattiih,  or  ritwH  hat  tat  h,  the 
strict  rendering  of  which  is  i/n,  but 
which  is  by  metaphorical  usage  em- 
ployed to  denote  a  sin-offering.  So  in 
like  manner  U'.!;j^  dshdm  rendered  tres- 
pass-offering properly  and  primarily 
signifies  trespass.  In  accordance  with 
this  usage  the  apostle,  2  Cor.  5.  21,  says 
God  '  made  him  (Ciirist)  to  be  sin 
(auapTiai>  o  sin-offering)  for  us,  who 
knew  no  sin,  that  we  might  be  made 
the  righteousness  of  God.'  The  Gr. 
word  here  used  by  the  apostle  is  the 
same  by  which  the  Septuagint  in  more 
than  eighty  places  in  the  Pentateuch 
translate  the  Heb.  word  riHtOn  hattdh, 
sin,  which  in  all  these  places  our  Eng- 
lish version  renders  sin-offering.     Yet 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


it  is  at  the  same  lime  proper  to  observe 
that  the  term  may  be  taken  in  this  con- 
nexion as  an  abstract  for  the  concrete, 
and  simply  imply  lliat  God  treated  the 
Savior  as  if  he  were  a  sinner. 

The  distinction  ol' these  two  kinds  of 
oftoriiigs  is  exceedingly  difficult  to  be 
determined.  In  Lev.  o.  u,  6,  tiie  terms 
are  used  as  signilyinij  precisely  tlie 
same  thing,  and  in  the  11th  and  I2lh 
verses  the  Trespass-oircring  is  thrice 
mentioned  as  a  Sin-olTering.  The  ex- 
planation suggested  by  Miciiaelis.  Jahn, 
Gesenius,  and  others,  viz.  lliut  sin-olier- 
ings  were  presented  for  otfences  of 
cominission,  and  Trespass-ofierings  for 
those  of  omission,  has  of  late  perhaps 
been  most  generally  received.  Yet  it 
fails  on  examination  to  yield  entire 
conviction  ;  for  some  otfences  mentioned 
among  trespasses,  (as  Lev.  5.  2,3.)  are 
as  much  of  a  positive  nature,  as  itny  of 
the  transgressions  indicated  in  a  general 
way  as  requiring  to  be  expiated  by 
Sin-offerings  ;  and  the  very  occasion  of 
a  Trespass-offering  (Lev,  5.  17-19.)  is 
described  in  language  which  most  strict- 
ly applies  to  a.  positive  violation  of  law. 
Nor  can  we  well  make  the  distinction 
consist  in  the  offence  having  been  com- 
mitted unawares  in  the  one  case,  and 
not  in  the  other  ;  for  if  the  person 
bound  to  present  a  Sin-offering,  is  uni- 
formly described  as  one  who  has  '  sin- 
ned through  ignorance,'  the  same  too  is 
the  character  of  transgressions  men- 
tioned in  connexion  with  Trespass-of- 
ferings, Lev.  5.  2,  3,  15.  On  the  whole, 
whatever  the  distinction  was,  it  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  of  much  import- 
ance ;  and  Winer,  (Realwdrterbucli), 
after  a  pretty  full  discussion  of  the  sub- 
ject, which  is  to  be  found  translated  in 
J.  P.  Smith's  '  Discourses  on  the  Sa- 
crifice and  Priesthood  of  Christ,'  re- 
marks, that  as  none  of  the  previous  so- 
lutions are  satisfactory,  and  '  as  in  the 
statemenis  of  the  law  itself  nothing  is 
contained  that  can  in  any  measure  con- 
duct us  safely  to  a  determination  upon 
the  difference  between  the  Sin-offering 


and  the  Trespass-offering,  it  seems  best 
entirely  to  renounce  making  a  distinc- 
tion '  By  which  he  probably  does  not 
mean  that  there  was  no  distiuciioii,  Ijut 
that  at  this  day  it  is  very  difficult,  if 
not  impossible,  to  discover  it. 

The  (lifficuliy  lies  in  great  measure  in 
in  this,  tliat  tlie  Sin-olfeiing  seems  to 
have  respect  to  a  lighter  species  ol  sin, 
and  yet  to  require  the  more  solemn 
offering  ;  -VNiliilst  ttie  Trespass-offering 
rchites  to  considerably  heavier  offences, 
and  yet  admits  of  an  easier  meiiiod  of 
obtaining  forgiveness.  Tiiis  is  evident 
from  the  iacl,  that  in  the  Trespass- 
offering  pigeons  or  turtle-doves  might 
be  offered,  or  in  case  of  extreme  poverty 
a  measure  ol  flour  ;  but  in  the  Sin-offer- 
ing  no  such  abatement  or  commutatiou 
was  allowed.  But  then  there  were 
some  peculiarities  attaching  to  the 
Trespass-ottering  which  may  perhaps 
afford  a  solution  to  this  apparent  anom- 
aly, and  which  we  shall  ailvert  to  alter 
staling  th-'  principal  points  of  differ- 
ence between  the  two,  (1.)  They  dif 
fered  in  the  occasions  on  which  they 
were  offered.  The  Sin-offerings,  it  ap 
pears,  were  presented  on  account  oi' 
something  done  amiss  through  igno- 
ranee  or  infirmity,  while  the  Tres- 
pass-offering would  seem  rather  to  have 
been  ibr  sins  committed  through  inad' 
vertence,  or  the  power  of  tcmjtlation,  and 
under  circumstances  which  appear  to 
admit  of  less  apology  than  the  pre. 
ceding.  Among  the  latter  were  sins  of 
great  enormity,  such  as  violence,  fraud, 
lying,  and  even  perjury  itself.  Lev.  5. 
1,4, — 6.  2,  3.  There  must  of  course  be 
very  different  degrees  of  criminality  io 
these  sins,  according  to  the  degree  of 
information  the  person  possessed,  and 
the  degree  of  conviction  against  which 
he  acted.  It  might  be  that  even  in  these 
things  the  person  had  sinned  through 
ignorance  only  ;  but  whatever  circum- 
stances there  might  be  to  extenuate  or 
aggravate  his  crime,  the  Trespass-offer- 
ing was  the  appointed  means  whereby 
he  was  to  obtain  mercy  and  forgiveness. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  IV. 


39 


(2.)  They  differed  in  the  circumstances 
attending  them.  In  the  Sin-offering 
there  was  a  particular  respect  to  the 
raak  and  quality  of  the  offender.  If  he 
were  a  priest,  he  was  to  offer  a  bullock  ; 
wliich  was  also  the  appointed  offering 
for  the  whole  congregation.  If  he  were 
a  ruler  or  magistrate,  he  must  offer  a 
kid,  a  male  ;  but  if  he  were  a  common 
individual,  a  female  kid  or  lamb  would 
suffice.  In  the  Trespass-offering,  no 
mention  is  made  of  a  bullock  for  any 
one,  but  only  of  a  female  kid  or  lamb, 
of  turtle-doves  or  young  pigeons,  or  in 
the  event  of  a  person's  not  being  able 
to  afford  them,  he  might  offer  about  five 
pints  of  flour,  which  would  be  accepted 
in  their  stead,  Lev.  5.  6,  7,  11.  This  is 
the  excepted  case  to  which  Paul  refers 
when  he  says,  Heb.  9.  22,  '  Almost  all 
things  are  by  the  law  purged  with  blood  ' 
Now  thus  fur  it  does  appear  that  the 
heavier  sins  were  to  be  atoned  for  by 
the  lighter  sacrifices  ;  but  then  there 
were  three  things  required  in  the  Tres- 
pass-offering which  had  no  place  in  the 
Sin-offering,  viz. :  confession  of  the 
crime,  restitution  of  the  property,  and 
compensation  for  the  injury.  Suppose 
a  person  had  *  robbed  God  '  by  keeping 
back  a  part  of  his  tithes,  whether  inten- 
tionally  or  not,  he  must,  as  soon  as  it 
was  discovered,  present  his  offering, 
confess  his  fault,  restore  what  he  had 
unjustly  taken,  and  add  one  fifth  more 
of  its  value,  as  a  compensation  of  the 
injury  he  had  done.  Lev.  5.  5. — 6.  5. 
The  same  process  was  to  take  place  if 
by  fraud  or  violence  he  had  injured  a 
man.  Num.  5.  6-8.  This  gives  a  decided 
preponderance  to  the  Trespass-offering, 
and  shows  that  the  means  used  for  the 
expiation  of  different  offences  bore  a 
just  proportion  to  the  quality  of  those 
offences.  We  do  not  affirm  that  this 
observation  clears  up  all  the  difficulty 
respecting  the  distinction  of  the  two 
kinds  of  ofierings,  but  that  it  removes 
some  part  of  it  we  think  there  can  be  no 
doubt. 


The  Sin-offerings  were  of  two  kinds, 
the  greater  and  the  less.     The  greater 
I  were  offered,  (1)  When  the  high-priest 
i  had  committed  an  offence,  and  thereby 
5  brought   guilt  upon  the   wliole  nation. 
In  this  case  he  was  required  to  bring 
the  greatest  of  all  the  sacrifices,  a  young 
j  bullock,  because  he  was  the  least  ex- 
cusable of  all  men  if  he  knew  not  the 
\  law  of    God,   or    heedlessly  did    any 
thing  contrary  to  it.     This  victim  he 
was  to  bring  to  tlie  door  of  the  taberna- 
cle, lay  his  hand  upon  its  head,  and  kill 
it  before  the  Lord.     A  part  of  the  blood 
was  then  jetted  with  his  finger  seven 
times   towards  the   separating  veil  or 
j  curtain  of  the  sanctuary,  a  part  of  it 
!  was  sprinkled  on  the  altar  of  incense, 
j  and   the   remainder  poured  out  on  the 
]  ground  at  the  foot  of  the  altar  of  burnt- 
I  offerings.     The  inward  fat  was  then  to 
be  burnt  upon  the  altar,  but  the  skin 
and  all  the  remaining  parts  were  to  be 
carried  out  and  burnt  without  the  gates 
of  the  camp  or  city.     (2.)  When  the 
whole  nation  had  committed  an  offence 
through  ignorance,  and  afterwards  re- 
pented.    In  this  case  the  offering  was 
the    same,  a    young    bullock   without 
blemish,  upon  which  the  elders  of  the 
j  congregation  were  to  lay  their  hands, 
I  and  then  the  victim  was  to  be  slam,  and 
j  the  same  ceremonies  used  in  the  dis- 
posal  of  the  blood,  as  in  the  similar 
offering  of  the  priest.     (3.)    On  the 
great  day  of  atonement  for  the  high- 
priest  and  the  nation.     The  ceremonies, 
which  were  more  numerous  and  impos- 
ing than  usual,  will  be  detailed  in  the 
notes  on  the  I6th  ch.,  where  we  have 
treated  at  full  length  of  the  t,wo-fold 
ordinance   of  the  sacrificial   and    the 
scape  goat. 

The  lesser  kind  of  Sin-offerings  were 
brought  in  the  following  cases.  (I.) 
When  a  magistrate  or  ruler  committed 
an  offence  through  error,  which  after- 
wards came  to  his  knowledge.  His 
sacrifice  was  then  to  be  a  kid  of  the 
goats  without    blemish,  whose    blood 


40 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490 


CHAPTER  IV. 
\  ND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo 
-^*-  ses,  saying, 
2  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 

was  parlly  smeared  upon  the  altar,  and  , 
partly  poured  upon  the  ground.     The  | 
fat  pieces  only  came  to  the  altar  ;  the  | 
rest  fell  to  the  priest.     Lev.  4.  22-26.  j 
(2.)    When   a    private    person    sinned  ! 
through  ignorance.     The  sacrifice  pre- 
scribed was   a  ewe   or   a   female  kid. 
(3.)  When  a  woman  was  purified  from 
a  long-continued  hemorrhage  ;  or,  after 
child-birth,  had  reached  the  time  of 
purification.     Lev.  12.  6,  8.— 15.  25-30. 
(4.)  When  one  had  a  running  issue,  as 
mentioned  Lev.  15.  2,  14, 15.   (5.)  When 
a  Nazarile  had  touched  a  corpse,  or  the 
time  of  his  vow  was  completed.    Num. 
6.  10,  14.     (6.)  On  the  consecration  of 
a  priest  or  Levite.     Lev.  9.  23.     Num. 
8.  8,  12.     (7.)  On  the  purification  of  a 
leper.     Lev.  14.  19-31.     The  other  de- 
tails of  the  offering  will  be  noticed  as 
we  proceed. 

In  contemplating  the  institution  of 
the  Sin-offering,  the  strongest  impres- 
sion perhaps  which  we  receive  from  it  is 
that  of  guilt  and  responsibility  attach- 
ing, in  the  sight  of  God,  to  sins  of  in- 
firmity and  ignorance  ;  for  it  is  to  such 
that  it  mainly  has  respect.  W^e  are 
prone  to  imagine  that  an  offence  com- 
mitted unintentionally  or  unawares, 
cannot  incur  the  charge  of  guilt.  Men 
do  not  scruple  to  plead  their  ignorance, 
their  infirmities,  their  natural  and  ha- 
bitual propensities  in  excuse  for  their 
misdeeds.  But  the  law  of  God  deter- 
mines otherwise.  It  enjoins  an  onerous 
ceremony  for  the  expiation  of  sins  un- 
consciously committed.  The  sin,  it  is 
true,  is  not  so  great  as  if  it  were  done 
knowingly,  wilfully,  and  presumptuous- 
ly ;  yet  still  il  is  sin,  and  as  such  needs 
an  atonement.  Without  the  shedding 
of  blood  there  was  no  remission.  At 
the  same  time  we  are  not  to  lose  sight 
of  the  consolalioii  which  flows  through 


rael,  saying,  alf  a  soul  shall  sin 
through  ignorance  against  any  of 

a  ch.  5.  15,  17.     Nnm.  15.  22.  &c.     1  Sam. 
14.  27.     Ps    19.  12. 


this  typical  ordinance  to  the  bosom  of 
the  penitent  believer.  The  language 
of  the  Apostle,  Heb.  13.  11-13,  makes  il 
evident  that  the  Sin-offering  pointed 
directly  to  Christ,  through  whose  effi- 
cacious atonement  all  his  sins,  whelli'.'r 
of  greater  or  less  aggravation,  are  can- 
celled and  abolished.  It  is  those  daily 
infirmities,  those  sins  unconsented  to, 
and  yet  committed  ;  those  faults  too 
covert  for  detection,  or  too  late  detect- 
ed ;  it  is  they  that  constitute  his  daily 
struggles,  and  wage  within  him  an  un- 
ceasing warfare.  And  when  he  has 
seen  the  sins  of  his  wilful  alienation 
borne  away  by  the  atoning  sacrifice, 
these  cleaving  vestiges  of  a  corrupt 
nature  will  often  vex  him  with  painTul 
fears,  lest  there  should  still  be  a  demand 
of  wrath  against  him.  How  appropri- 
ate then  is  this  exhibition  of  a  continual 
offering  for  our  continual  need  !  *  He 
that  knew  no  sin  was  made  sin  (a  sin- 
offering)  for  us.'  Here  we  have  par- 
don ;  not  once,  to  cancel  the  past  debt 
and  begin  on  a  new  score  ;  but  pardon 
daily,  hourly  renewed,  as  often  as  the 
Sin-offering  is  pleaded  before  the  Fa- 
ther, is  brought  in  faith,  and  laid  upon 
the  altar  before  the  Lord.  We  do  no- 
thing well.  If  we  ^:)ray,  it  is  with  cold 
and  wandering  thoughts  ;  if  we  hear,  it 
is  with  distracted  and  forgetful  minds  ; 
WG  are  continuallysurprised, continually 
overtaken,  continually  turned  aside  by 
the  current  of  temptation,  that  runs  so 
strong  against  us,  when  perhaps  we 
cannotconvict  ourselvesof  one  indulged, 
deliberate  sin.  Therefore  did  the  God 
of  mercies  ordain  this  peculiar  institu- 
tion, prefiguring  to  them  of  old  the 
divine  oblation  to  be  once  offered,  but 
forever  efficacious,  for  the  pardon  of  this 
and  every  kind  of  guilt. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  IV. 


41 


the  commandments  of  the  Lord 
concerning  things  which  ought 
not  to  be  done,  and  shall  do  against 
any  of  them; 


].  The  Sin-offering  for  the  Anointed 
Priest. 
2.  Shall  sin  through  ignorance  against 
any  of  the  commandments.  Heb.  U;S3 
tiT2)2  ^^?2  n^^rn  Kt:rin  ^:d  mphesh 
ki  tchetci  bishgagdh  mikkol  mitzvolh 
a  soul  when  it  shall  sin  through  inad- 
vertently erring  from  any  of  the  com- 
mandments. The  true  construction  is, 
not  '  sinning  against,'  but '  erring  from,' 
as  the  phraseology  in  the  original  is  in 
effect  the  same  with  that  in  Ps.  119. 10. 
'  Let  me  not  wander  from  C^i^'lTl  ^5^ 

al  tashgcni)  thy  commandments.' 

IT  Through  ignorance  ;  i.e.  unadvisedly, 
unwittingly,  unawares.  The  Heb.  u53lI3 
shegugdh,  here  used,  comes  from  na*^ 
shdgdh,  to  go  astray,  to  err,  to  trans- 
gress through  mistake,  ignorance,  or 
inadvertency.  In  the  Greek  it  is  some- 
limes  rendered  by  ayvoia  ignorance,  but 
here,  and  frequently  elsewhere,  by 
aKovanoi  unwillingly,  the  exact  oppo- 
site to  EKovaiixii  willingly  or  wilfully, 
qpcurring  Heb.  10.26,  and  opposite  also 
to  what  the  law,  Num.  15.  57,  30,  terms 
sinning  with  a  high  hand,  or  presump- 
tuously. The  import  of  the  term  is 
fully  disclosed,  Num.  35.  11,  where 
mention  is  made  of  '  killing  a  person 
at  unawares;'  Heb.  tl^y:]  shegdguh, 
by  error,  unwittingly,  which,  in  the 
parallel  passage,  Deut.  19.  14,  is  ex- 
pressed by  ignorantly,  or  literally,  with- 
out knowledge  ;  both  which  terms,  for 
greater  explicitness,  are  joined  together 
in  Josh.  20.  3,  '  The  slayer  that  killeth 
any  person  unawares  (na^TD  bishga- 
gdh, by  error),  and  unwittingly  (i.e. 
without  knowledge),'  which  is  also 
opposed  to  a  '  lying  in  wait,'  i.  e.  with 
a  set  purpose  and  intention  to  kill; 
Deut.  19.  11.  Ex.  21.  13.  The  Apos- 
tie,  Heb.  9.  7,  denominates  such  sins 
ayvtruaTa  ignorances,  or  ignorant  tres- 
4* 


3  bif  the  priest  that  is  anointed 
do  sin  according  to  the  sin  of  the 

b  ch.  8.  12. 

passes,  more  fully  explained,  Heb.  5.  3 
by  two  distinct  words,  where  he  speaks 
of  the  duty  of  priests  '  to  have  compas- 
sion on  the  ignorant,  and  on  them  that 
are  out  of  the  way.'  These  ignorances 
or  errors  therefore  occurred  when  any 
one,  through  not  knowing,  or  forgetting, 
or  not  duly  heeding  the  law,  and  im- 
pelled rather  by  a  casual  infirmity,  than 
by  a  settled  intention,  committed  some 
foul  act  which  God  had  forbidden.  In 
such  cases,  as  soon  as  the  transgression 
came  to  the  knowledge  of  the  offender, 
he  was  required  to  offer  the  sacrifice 
here  prescribed  ;  and  not  to  think  that 
ignorance  or  inadvertency  was  an  ex- 
cuse ibr  his  sin.  But  he,  on  the  other 
hand,  who  sinned  presumptuously,  and 
with  an  avowed  contempt  of  the  law 
and  the  law-maker,  was  to  be  cut  off, 
and  there  remained  no  more  sacrifice  for 

the  sin,  Heb.  10.  26,  27. IT  And  shall 

do  against  any  of  them.  Heb.  r!"ii;3>T 
^'^1)2  T!n)^)Z  vedsdhmeahath  mchtnnah, 
shall  do  of  (any)  one  of  them.  Gr. 
TToiricj)  iv  Ti  a-'  avruv,  shall  do  any  one 
thing  of  them.  The  phrase  '  do  against' 
does  not  perhaps  materially  vary  from 
a  correct  rendering,  but  the  obvious 
idea  of  the  original  is  the  doing  of 
something  which  ought  not  to  be  done. 
The  Jewish  writers  insist  on  the  fol- 
lowing circumstances  relative  to  the 
sin  mentioned  in  the  text.  (1.)  Its 
being  committed  through  ignorance,  or 
mistake,  or  involuntarily.  (2.)  Its 
being  against  some  negative  command. 
(3.)  Its  including /ac?s,  not  words  or 
thoughts,  as  appears  from  the  expres- 
sion, '  and  shall  do  against  any  of  tliem.' 
(4.)  Its  consisting  of  such  facts  as,  if 
perpetrated  willingly,  would  subject  th** 
offender  to  a  fil'D  kereth,  cr  capital 
cutting  off. 

3.  The  priest  thai  ,s  anointed.    That 
is,  the  High  Priest,  as  rendered  Loth  in 


42 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


people  ;  then  let  him  bring  for  his 
sin  which  he  hath  sinned,  ca  young 
bullock  without  blemish  unto  the 
LoKD  for  a  sin-offering. 

4  And  he  shall  bring  the  bullock 
dunto  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of 


c  ch.  9.  2. 


ch.  1. 


the  Gr.  and  Chal.;  for  the  High  Priest 
only  was,  in  afler  times,  thus  honored. 
Lev.  21. 10.  16.32.  Ex.  29.  29.  Thus, 
as  the  apostle  says,  '  The  law  made 
those  high  priests  who  had  infirmity, 
and  who  needed  daily  to  offer  up  sacri- 
fices, first,  for  their  own  sins,  and  then 
for  the  people's  ;'  but  our  High  Priest, 
Clirist  Jesus,  was  holy,  harmless,  unde- 
filed,  and  separate  from  sinners,  and 
made  higher  than  the  heavens.  —— 
IT  S>in  according  to  the  sin  of  the  people. 
Heb.  tS^n  D?2*il"i^^  leashmath  hddm,  to 
the  guilt  of  the  people,  i.  e.  so  as  to 
cause  the  people  to  transgress  and  bring 
guilt  upon  themselves,  by  emboldening 
them  in  iniquity  by  his  pernicious  ex- 
ample, or  involving  them,  in  virtue  of 
the  intimate  relation  subsisting  between 
priest  and  people,  in  the  consequences 
of  his  guilt.  Thus  1  Chron.21,  3, '  Why 
then  doth  my  Lord  require  this  thing? 
Why  will  he  bring  a  cause  of  trespass 
(ri)2'^iO  leashmah)  to  Israel  ?' where 
the  word  rendered  '  cause  of  trespass,' 
is  the  same  with  that  occurring  here,  and 
rendered  '  sin.'  Gr.  rov  tov  "Saov  auapreiv 
so  that  the  people  sin.  Vulg. '  delinquere 
faciens  populum,'  so  as  to  make  the 
people  to  offend.  Chazkuni,  a  Jewish 
commentator,  explains  it  thus:  'To 
make  the  people  guilty,  in  that  he  hath 
taught  and  permitted  them  to  do  a  thing 

forbidden.' IT  A  young  bullock.  Heb. 

'npD  *p  'IS  par  ben  bakdr,  a  young 
bullock,  by  which  is  meant  one  little 
larger  than  a  calf.  It  would  almost 
seem  that  there  was  ground  for  the  re- 
mark  made  by  some,  that  in  great 
offences  the  sacrifices  were  compara- 
tively small,  lest  it  should  be  imagined 
that  pardon  was  obtained  by  the  value 


the  congregation  before  the  Lord 
and  shall  lay  iiis  hand  upon  the 
bullock's  head,  and  kill  the  bullock 
before  the  Lord. 

5  And  the  priest  that  is  anointed 
eshall  take  of  the  bullock's  blood, 

e  ch.  ir,.  14.     Numb.  19.  4. 


of  the  offering.  Here  the  word  em- 
ployed is  "^5  par,  properly  a  calf,  while 
the  victim  in  the  peace-offering  was 
Ti'J  shor,  an  ox,  though  rendered  less 
strictly  in  our  version   a  bullock. — r^ 

IT  Let  him  bring  for  his  sin for  a 

sin-offering.  The  same  original  word 
^^^L:^  haltah,sin,  is  used  in  both  cases. 
This,  as  we  already  remarked,  is  the 
name  both  for  sin  and  the  sin-offering  ; 
as  the  word  piaculum  was  among  the 
heathen,  which  signified  both  a  great 
crime  and  the  expiatory  sacrifice  for  it. 
See  Rom.  8.  3.  2  Cor.  5.  21,  where  tho 
word  aixanna  sin,  is  Used  in  the  same 
manner. 

4.  Shall  lay  his  hands,  ^-c.  In  the 
trespass-offering  and  other  sacrifices  of 
this  nature,  confession  was  joined  with 
the  imposition  of  hands  ;  but  in  the  sin- 
offering  it  is  not  mentioned,  though 
some  commentators  have  supposed  it 
was  implied.  But  we  prefer  to  adhere 
to  the  simple  letter  of  the  record.  But 
that  the  offering  was,  or  ought  to  have 
been  made  in  a  penitent,  believing,  and 
imploring  frame  of  spirit,  there  can  be 
no  doubt.  'Neither  reconciliation-day 
(Lev.  16.),  nor  sin-offering,  nor  tres- 
pass-offering do  make  atonement,  sav- 
ing for  theiTi  that  repent  and  believe  in 
their  atonement.' — Maimonides.  An- 
other of  the  Jewish  writers  (Nitzachon, 
p.  11)  observes,  '  When  a  man  sacrificed 
a  beast  he  was  to  think,  *  I  am  more  a 
beast  than  this  present ;  for  I  liave  sin- 
ned, and  for  the  sins  which  I  have  com- 
mitted, I  offer  this  animal ;  though  it 
were  more  just  that  he  who  sinned 
should  suffer  death  than  this  beast.' 
Wherefore  by  this  sacrifice  a  man  was 
led  to  begin  his  repentance.' 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  IV. 


43 


and  bring  it  to  the  tabernacle  of 
tlie  congregation  : 

6  And  the  priest  shall  dip  his  fin- 
ger in  the  blood,  and  sprinkle  of 
the  blood  seven  times  before  the 
Lord,  before  the  vail  of  the  sanc- 
tuary. 

7  And  the  priest  shall  ^put  some 
of  the  blood  upon  the  horns  of  the 
altar  of  sweet  incense  before  the 
LoED,  Avhich  is  in  the  tabernacle 
of  the  congregation  ;  and  shall 
pour  gall  the  blood  of  the  bullock 
at  the  bottom  of  the  altar  of  the 
burnt-offering,  which  is  at  the  door 
of  [he  tabernacle  of  the  congrega- 
tion. 

8  And  he  shall  take  off  from  it 

I"  ch.  S.  15,  and  9.  9,  and  16.  IS.     g  ch.  5.  9. 

5.  And  bring  it  to  the  tabernacle  of 
the  congregation.  By  which  is  nieaiit 
that  it  should  be  brought  into  the  very 
sanctuary,  as  appears  from  what  fol- 
l(»ws.  The  preposition  ^i^  c/,  might 
indeed  properly  have  been  rendered 
intOj  as  in  the  cases  mentioned  in  the 
Note  on  p:x.  28.  30.  Gr,  £,s  mv  ok^v^v 
into  the  tabernacle. 

6.  Sprinkle  of  the  blood  seven  times. 
A  mystical  number,  signifying  the  full 
iUid  perfect  cleansing  oi  sin,  and  carry- 
ing with  it  also  an  implication  of  the 
aggravated  Keinousness  of  the  offence  as 
committed  by  a  priest  j  for  this,  it  ap- 
pears,  was  peculiar  to  this  sacrifice  for 
sin,  and  to  that  for  the  whole  congrega- 
tion. We  do  not  read  of  its  being 
adopted  in  any  other  case.  It  was  to 
be  sprinkled  towards  the  vail  of  the 
sanctuary,  where  the  Lord,  who  was  to 
be  propitiated,  dwelt,  and  from  this 
ceremony  being  practised  in  no  other 
instance  save  in  that  of  the  congrega- 
tional offering,  it  would  seem  to  imply 
that  in  respect  to  offences  of  this  nature, 
there  was  peculiar  need  of  the  offerer's 
having  recourse  to  that  '  blood  of  sprink- 
ling,' which  could  alone  speak  peace  to 
his  conscience.  Tiie  restoration  of  the 
divine  favor  was  not  so  easily  obtained. 


all  the  fat  of  the  bullock  for  the 
sin-offering;  the  fat  that  covereth 
the  inwards,  and  all  the  fat  that  is 
upon  the  inwards, 

9  And  the  two  kidneys,  and  the 
fat  that  is  upon  them,  which  is  by 
the  flanks,  and  the  caul  above  the 
liver,  with  the  kidneys,  it  shall  he 
take  away, 

10  I'As  it  was  taken  off  from  the 
bullock  of  the  sacrifice  of  peace- 
offerings :  and  the  priest  shall  burn 
them  upon  the  altar  of  the  burnt- 
offering. 

11  JAnd  the  skin  of  the  bullock, 
and  all  his  flesh,  with  his  head, 
and  with  his  legs,  and  his  inwards, 
and  his  dung: 

i>ch.  3.3,4,  5.    iExod29.  14.   Numb.  19.  6. 

He  must  struggle  for  it.  He  must  urge 
the  plea  of  atoning  blood  aguin  and 
again. ff  Before  the  vail  of  the  sanc- 
tuary.   Heb.  iijip-  rr^s   ^:l^  ni< 

cth  pent  paroketh  hakkodesh,  and  be- 
fore the  vail  of  holiness.  Gr.  kutu  to 
KaTaiicrac-jxa  ru  ayiov  before  the  holy  vail. 
The  clause  is  plainly  exegetic.il  of  the 
preceding  '  before  the  Lord,'  which  is 
equivalent  to  '  before  the  Shekinah,'  and 
this  we  know  had  its  residence  in  the 
holy  of  holies,  just  behind  the  separat- 
ing vail  between  the  two  apartments, 
called  in  Heb.  9.  3,  '  the  second  vail.' 

7.  And  the  priest  shall  put,  ^-c.  This 
also  was  peculiar  to  this  sacrifice,  and 
to  that  for  the  whole  congregation,  v. 
17.  The  blood  was  thus  applied  to  each 
horn  or  spire  of  the  incense-altar,  pro- 
bably to  intimate  that  no  intercessions 
or  prayers  would  be  accepted  from  the 
sinner  till   he  was  absolved   from   his 

guilt  by  virtue  of  the  atoning  blood. 

IT  Shall  pour  all  the  blond  ;  i.  e.  all  that 
is  left  after  the  sprinkling.  It  could 
not  be  absolutely  all,  but  the  quantity 
of  blood  sprinkled  in  tiie  sanctuary  was 
so  snmll,  that  the  remainder  might, 
without  impropriety,  be  termed  the 
whole.  During  the  Israelites'  residence 
in  the  wilderness,  it  is  probable  they 


44 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490 


12  Even  the  whole  bullock  shall  i  him  on  the  wood  with  fire:  where 
he  carry  forth  without  the  camp  |  the  ashes  are  poured  out  shall  he 
unto   a'  clean   place,    ^where   the  |  be*burnt. 
ashes  are   poured   out,  and  iburn  I  ,  ^^^  ^^  ^^        ,  ^^^  ^3  ^^ 


lad  receptacles  under  ground  with  con- 
ct-yancos  to  carry  off  the  blood.     After  j 
ilse  biiihiiiig  of  llio  Temple,  there  were  i 
two  holes,  one   on  the  west  side  of  the  | 
ailur,  the  other  on  the  south,  by  which 
tlse  blood  was  conveyed  into  d  subter- 
lUMcan    channel,   communicating    with 
the  brook  Kodrou. 

12.  Shail  he  carry  forth  uiUiout  the 
cantp.  litb.  i^":::"!"  hotzi,  he  or  one 
shall  carry  forth  ;  undoubtedly  an  in- 
siaiK-e  i)t  lii.it  indefinite  or  impersonal 
ioViii  of  ex:  res^iiun,  so  common  in  He- 
hicw,  wheie  the  singular,  like  the 
Ir  r.eli  'on  d  i  I, ' //i  t'y  say,  has  the  im- 
jHMi  of  ihe  j.lural.  And  thus  it  is  ren- 
(Incd  bnih  here  and  in  v.  21,  by  the  Gr. 
il'jiajvjii,  they  shall  carry  forth.  So 
isi  V.  24,  our  ver-sion  renders  '  in  the 
place  wliere  they  kill  tlie  burnt-offering,' 
when  the  original  is  uH*.!)'^  yish'hat,  he 
or  one  kills.  Tiiis  is  an  idiom  of  very 
extensive  use  and  of  the  utmost  import- 
ance in  tlie  sacred  writings.  See  it 
more  fully  illustrated  in  the  Note  on 
Lev.  1.  5.  'Ibis  precept  has  a  primary 
reference  to  llie  state  of  tiie  Israelites 
during  their  wandering  in  the  wilder- 
ness. After  their  settlement  in  Canaan 
and  the  erection  of  the  Temple  at  Jeru- 
salem, they  carried  them  out  of  the  city. 
Tlie  sacrifice,  now  considered  as  having 
the  sin  of  the  priest  transferred  from 
himself  to  it,  by  his  imjiosition  of 
hands,  was  become  unclean  and  abomi- 
nable, and  was  carried  as  it  were  out 
of  God's  sight.  The  ceremony,  there- 
fore, was  strikingly  significant  of  the 
sinfulness  of  this  sin.  The  fat  portions 
only  of  the  victim,  with  the  kidneys 
and  caul,  after  be^ng  detached  from  the 
rest  were  to  be  burnt  upon  the  allar. 
No  other  part  was  to  come  near  the 
altar,  nor  was  the  least  share  of  it  per- 
nutted  to  either  priest  or  people,  but  it 


was  to  be  carried  out  of  the  camp  skin 
and  all  entire,  and  burnt  in  a  fire  on  the 
ground.  By  this  was  denoted  the  of- 
ferer's being  in  a  state  of  guilt,  wholly 
unworthy  to  communicate  with  God, 
and  like  the  offering  itself,  deserved  to 
be  excluded  the  society  of  his  people, 
till  reconciled  by  the  sacrifice  now  made 
in  his  stead.  Thus  Clirist,  who  was 
made  sin  or  a  sin-oflering  lor  us,  '  sul- 
fered  without  the  gate.'  Even  this 
slight  accordance  of  llie  type  and  the 
antitype  serves  to  show  how  comjdetely 
all  the  grand   observaiues  of  the  law 

had  their  realization  in  liim. IT  Burn 

him  on  the  wood  with  fire.  Not  upon 
an  altar,  but  on  a  fire  made  with  woe  u 
upon  the  ground,  to  show  the  odiou:-- 
ness  of  the  sin.  As  the  v.hole  burnt 
sacrifices  were  barnt  on  the  altar  be- 
cause they  were  an  '  ofiering  of  sweet- 
smelling  savor  to  God,*  so  tins  was  burnt 
without  the  camp  upon  the  ground  t  > 
show  that  the  odor  of  it  was  ungrateli  I 

and  abominable. IT  Where  the  ash(6 

are  poured  out.  There  were  two  place  6 
where  the  ashes  were  poured,  one  by 
the  side  of  the  altar  where  they  weie 
first  laid,  of  which  mention  is  inac'c 
Lev.  1.  16  ;  the  olher,  without  the  pr  ;- 
cincts  of  the  camp,  to  uiiich,  as  to  a 
general  receptacle,  the  aslies  and  otbor 
refuse  matter  of  the  camp  was  conveyed. 
The  publicity  here  given  to  the  burning 
of  the  sin-oflering  of  the  priest,  might 
be  intended  to  convey  u  deeper  impres- 
sion of  the  enormity  of  his  sin  com])ared 
j  with  that  of  the  common  people,  al- 
1  though  the  same  thing  was  comuiauded 
I  in  case  the  whole  congregation  had 
sinned.  There  was,  therefore,  a  pecu- 
liar reproach  attached  to  this  sacrifice, 
intimated  by  the  repetition  of  the  pre- 
sent order— from  the  offence  upon  which 
it  was  founded. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  IV. 


45 


13  II  And  mif  the  whole  congre- 
gation of  Israel  sin  through  igno- 
rance, "and  the  thing  be  hid  from 
tlie  eyes  of  the  assembly,  and  they 
hive  done  somewhat  against  any 
of  the  commandments  of  the  Lord 
ciincerning  things  which  should 
nor  be  done,  and  are  guilty  ; 

l-l  When  the  sin  which  they  have 
sinned  against  it  is  known,  then 
t!)e  congregation  shall  offer  a  young 
i}ul!oclc  fur  the  sin,  and  bring  liim 
befure  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation. 

15  And  the  elders  of  the  congre- 
gation oshall  lay  their  hands  upon 
the  head  of  the  bullock  before  the 
Lokd:  and  the  bullock  shall  be 
killed  before  the  Lord. 


■'■-'  Nmnb.  15.  24.     Josh.  7.  11. 
3,  4,  17.     "  ch.   1.    4. 


cli.  5.  2, 


2.— The    Sin-offering  for  the    Whole 
Congregation. 

13.  If  the  whole  congregation  sin. 
This  probably  refers  to  some  oversight 
in  acts  of  religious  worship,  or  to  some 
transgression  of  the  letter  of  the  law 
coramilted,  not  presumptuously,  but 
heedlessly,  as  in  the  case  mentioned 
1  Sam.  14.  32  ;  where,  after  smiting  the 
Philistines,  the  Israelites  '  flew  upon 
the  spoil,  and  took  sheep,  and  oxen,  and 
calves,  and  slew  them  on  the  ground : 
and  the  people  did  eat  them  with  the 
blood.'  This  was  a  congregational  sin. 
The  sacrifices  and  rites  in  this  case 
were  the  same  as  in  the  preceding  ;  only 
here  the  elders  laid  their  hands  on  the 
head  of  the  victim,  in  the  name  of  all 

the  congregation. IT  And  the  thing 

he  hid  from  the  eyes  of  the  assembly. 
Heb.  ^til^n  haltkdhal,  the  word  properly 
BUiswering  to  our  English  word  church, 
as  it  is  well  rendered  by  Ainsworth. 
Accordingly  Stephen  says  of  Moses, 
Acts  7.  38,  '  This  is  he  tliat  was  in  the 
church  in  the  wilderness  witli  the  angel 
that  spake  to  him.'  By  '  the  things 
oeing  hidden  from  their  eyes,'  is  meant 


16  pAnd  the  priest  that  is  anoint- 
ed shall  bring  of  the  bullock's  blood 
to  the  tabernacle  of  the  congrega- 
tion: 

17  And  the  priest  shall  dip  his 
finger  in  some  of  the  blood,  and 
sprinkle  it  seven  times  before  the 
Lord,  even  before  the  vail. 

18  And  he  shall  put  some  of  the 
blood  upon  the  horns  of  the  altar 
which  IS  before  the  Lord,  that  is 
in  the  tabernacle  cf  the  congrega- 
tion, and  shall  pour  out  all  the 
blood  at  the  bottom  of  the  altar  of 
the  burnt-offering,  which  2S  at  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation. 

19  And  he  shall  take  all  his  fat 
from  him,  and  burn  it  upon  the 
altar. 

P  ver.  5.     Heb.  9.  12,  13,  14. 


that  they  were  not  for  the  present  sensi- 
ble of  their  error  or  transgression.  The 
reference  is  to  a  case  where  they  had 
ignorantly  or  inadvertently  committed 
some  act  which  they  presumed  at  the 
time  to  be  lawful,  but  which  subsequent 
reflection  or  instruction  convinced  them 
was  sinful.  In  this  case,  as  soon  as 
they  came  to  a  sense  of  their  wrong-do- 
ing, the  elders,  or  heads  of  the  tribes, 
as  the  representatives  of  the  whole  body, 
were  to  bring  a  young  bullock  to  the 
tabernacle  and  present  it  to  the  high- 
priest,  who  was  to  offer  it  by  way  of 
atonement  for  them,  in  the  same  man- 
ner and  with  tlie  same  circumstances, 
that  he  did  the  other  for  himself. 

15.  The  elders  shall  lay  their  hands. 
Not  the  priests  in  this  case,  but  the 
heads  and  magistrates  of  the  nation, 
who  were  seventy  in  number.  As  all 
the  people  could  not  lay  their  hands 
upon  the  bullock,  it  was  sufficient  that 
it  were  done  by  the  elders,  or  a  part  of 
them,  in  the  name  of  the  congregation. 
Maimonides  says,  that  the  number  of 
elders  that  officiated  on  this  occasion 
was  three.  This  act  denoted  the  faith 
of  the  people  in  a  coming  Messiah, '  up- 


46 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


20  And  he  shall  do  with  the  bul- 
lock as  he  did  qwith  the  bullock 
for  a  sin-offering,  so  shall  he  do 
witn  this :  rand  the  priest  shall 
make  an  atonement  for  them,  and  it 
shall  be  ibrijiven  them. 

21  And  he  shall  carry  forth  the 
bullock  without  the  camp,  and  burn 
him  as  he  burned  the  first  bullock* 
it  is  a  sin-offering  for  the  congre- 
gation. 

22  ^  When  a  ruler  hath  sinned, 
and  sdone  somewhat  through  igno- 
rance against  any  of  the  command- 
ments of  the  Lord  his  God  con- 
cerinng  things  which  should  not 
be  done,  and  is  guilty  ; 

23  Or  tif  his  sin,  wherein  he  hath 
sinned,  come  to  his  knowledge ;  he 

iver.  3.  fNum.  15.  25.  Dan.  9- 24.  Rom. 
6.  11.  Heb.  2.  17.  and  10.  10,  11,  12.  iJohn 
1.  7.  and  2.  2.     =>  ver.  2.  13.     '  \  er.  14. 

on  whom  the  Lord  would  lay  the  ini- 
quity of  us  all. ^     Is.  53.  6. 

Z.—The  Sin-offering  for  the  Ruler. 

22.  When  a  ruler  hath  sinned.  Heb. 
fc^iIL^:  nasi,  prince,  i.  e.  one  preferred, 
elevated,  advanced  above  others  j  from 
S^TTj  ndsd,  to  lift  up.  It  is  a  common 
a])pellalion  both  of  supreme  and  subor- 
dinate rulers,  and  is  very  frequently 
used  to  signify  the  head  of  a  tribe. 
The  Jews  understand  it  peculiarly  of 
the  head  or  prince  of  the  great  Sanhe- 
drim, who  was  the  king  himself,  while 
they  were  under  kingly  government; 
but  it  seems  more  reasonable  lo  under- 
stand it  of  all  the  great  officers  or  ma- 
gistrates ;  any  one  who  held  any  kind 
of  political  dignity  among  the  people. 

IT  And  is  guilty,  or  if  his  sin  come 

to  his  knowledge  ;  i.e.  if  he  is  presently 
reminded  of  it  by  the  checks  of  his  own 
conscience,  or  if  after  a  time  it  be  sug- 
gested to  him  by  others.  The  ceremo- 
nies in  this  case  differed  from  those  in 
the  case  of  the  offering  of  the  anointed 
priest,  inasmuch  as  the  blood  of  the 
ruler's  sin-offering,  which  was  a  kid  of 


shall  bring  his  offering,  a  kid  of  the 
goats,  a  male  without  blemish  : 

24  And  "he  shall  lay  his  hand 
upon  the  head  of  the  goat,  and  kill 
it  in  the  place  where  they  kill  the 
burnt-offering  before  the  Lord  :  it 
is  a  sin-offering. 

25  "And  the  priest  shall  take  of 
the  blood  of  the  sin-offering  with 
his  finger,  and  put  it  upon  the 
horns  of  the  altar  of  burnt-offering, 
and  shall  pour  out  his  blood  at  the 
bottom  of  the  altar  of  burnt-of- 
fering. 

26  And  he  shall  burn  all  his  fat 
upon  the  altar,  as  ythe  fat  of  the 
sacrifice  of  peace-offerings :  zand 
the  priest  shall  make  an  atonement 
for  him  as  concerning  his  sin,  and 
it  shall  be  forgiven  him. 

'-1  ver.  4,  &c-  ^  ver.  30.  y  ch.  3.  5.  ^  ver. 
20-  Num.  15.  28. 


the  goats  instead  of  a  bullock,  was  not 
to  be  brought  into  the  tabernacle,  but 
was  all  to  be  bestowed  upon  the  brazen 
altar,  nor  was  the  flesh  of  it  to  be  burnt 
without  the  camp  ;  which  intimated 
that  the  sin  of  a  ruler,  thouglj  worse 
than  that  of  a  common  person,  was  not 
so  heinous  as  of  tliat  of  the  high  priest, 
or  of  the  whole  congregation. 

25.  Put  it  upon  the  horns  of  the  altar. 
In  every  sacrifice  for  sin  the  horns  of 
one  or  other  of  the  altars  were  required 
to  be  touched  with  the  blood,  but  with 
this  difference,  that  in  the  sacrifice  for 
the  sins  of  the  high  priest  and  the 
people,  when  the  blood  of  the  victim 
was  brought  into  the  sanctuary,  the 
horns  of  the  altar  of  incense  were 
sprinkled,  in  others,  those  of  the  altar 
of  holocaust. 

26.  He  shall  burn  all  his  (i.  e.  its) /a? 
upon  the  altar.  Nothing  is  here  said, 
as  in  the  case  of  two  of  the  previous 
offerings,  v.  12,  21,  which  were  to  be 
burnt  without  the  camp,  of  the  disposal 
that  should  be  made  of  the  flesh  of  the 
the  victim.  But  in  Lev.  6.  26,  2.9,  and 
Num.  IS.  9,  10,  the  prescribed  law  of 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  IV. 


47 


27  TI  And  aif  any  one  of  the  com- 
mon peop-ie  sin  through  ignorance, 
while  he  doeth  somewhat  against 
any  of  the  commandments  of  the 
Lord  concerning  tlivigs  which 
ought  not  to  be  done,  and  be  guilty ; 

28  Or  bjf  his  sin  which  he  Jiath 
sinned  come  to  Jiis  knowledge ; 
then  he  shall  bring  his  offering,  a 
kid  of  the  goats,  a  female  without 
blemish,  for  his  sin  which  he  hath 
sinned. 

29  cAnd  he  shall  lay  his  hand 
Upon  the  head  of  the  sin-offering, 
and  slay  the  sin-offering  in  the 
place  of  the  burnt-offering. 

30  And  the  priest  shall  take  of 
the  blood  thereof  with  his  finger, 
and  put  it  upon  the  horns  of  the 
altar  of  burnt-offering,  and  shall 
pour  out  all  the  blood  thereof  at 
the  bottom  of  the  altar. 

31  And  dhe  shall  take  away  all 
the  fat  thereof,  eas  the  fat  is  taken 

a  ver.  2.  Num.  15.  27.  b  ygr.  23.  c  yer.  4. 
24.     't  ch.  3.  14.     ech.  3.  3. 

the  Sin-offering  is,  that  the  priest  and 
his  sons  should  eat  it  in  the  sanctuary, 
and  no  where  else  ;  provided  that  they 
were  free  from  uncleanness. 

4. — The    Sin-offering  for    one  of  the 
common  people. 

27.  Jf  any  one  of  the  common  people. 
Heb.  y^i^n  'D^'!2  nm  t'CD  Di<  im  ne- 
phesh  ahath  meam  hddretz,  if  one  soul 
of  the  people  of  the  land ;  i,  e.  as 
rightly  rendered,  any  of  the  common 
people,  whether  private  Israelite,  priest, 
or  Levite,  with  the  exception  of  the 
high  priest  and  ruler  mentioned  above. 

28.  A  kid  of  the  goats.  This  was 
the  ordinary  sacrifice  prescribed  on  such 
occasions  :  but  when  the  poverty  of  the 
offerer  prevented  such  an  oblation,  one 
of  less  value  was  appointed  ;  Lev.  5. 
]1,  12.  The  ceremonies  were  nearly 
the  same  as  in  the  preceding  cases. 

31.  For  a  sweet  savor  unto  the  Lord. 
A.Ilhough  this  phrase  is  used  concerning 


;  away  from  off   the    sacrifice  of 
I  peace-offerings  ;     and    the    priest 

shall  burn  it  upon   the  altar  for  a 
I  fsweet  savour  unto  the  Lord  :  gand 

the  priest  shall  make  an  atonement 
I  for  him,  and  it  shall  be  forgiven 

him. 

I      32  And  if  he  bring  a  lamb  for  a 
I  sin-offering,  hhe  shall   bring   it  a 

female  without  blemish. 

33  And  he  shall  lay  his  hand  up- 
on the  head  of  the  sin-offering, 
and  slay  it  for  a  sin-offering  in  the 
place  where  they  kill  the  burnt- 
offering. 

34  And  the  priest  shall  take  of 
the  blood  of  the  sin-offering  with 
his  finger,  and  put  it  upon  the 
horns  of  the  altar  of  burnt-offering, 
and  shall  pour  out  all  the  blood 
thereof  at  the  bottom  of  the  altar: 

35  And  he  shall  take  away  all 
the  fat  thereof,  as  the  fat  of  the 
lamb  is  taken  away  from  the  sacri- 

fExod.  29.  18.     ch.  1.  9.     ETCr2G.    '>ver, 

23. 


the  burnt-offering  and  the  peace-offer- 
ing, yet  it  is  nowhere  said  of  the  fore- 
going  sin-offerings ;  '  the  reason  of 
which,'  says  Bp.  Patrick,  '  I  am  not 
able  to  give,  unless  it  were  to  comfort 
the  lowest  sort  of  people  with  the  hope 
of  God's  mercy,  though  their  offerings 
were  mean  compared  with  those  of 
others.' 

33.  And  slay  it  for  a  sin-offering  in 
the  place  where  they  kill  the  burnt- 
offering.  Here  again  the  Gr.  gives 
correctly  the  plural  form  a6a^ov<Tiv  they 
shall  slay,  just  as  our  translation  in  the 
same  clause  renders  t:n'i;'i  yish'hat, 
though  singular,  they  kill,  they  are 
accustomed  to  kill, 

35.  According  to  the  offerings  made  by 
fire  unto  the  Lord.  Heb.  mn"i  "'tZJit  "^^ 
al  ishe  Yehovah  ;  which  may  be  render- 
ed, upon,  with,  or  beside  the  offerings 
Tuade  by  fire  ;  i.  e.  in  addition  to  the 
burnt-offerings  which  were  daily  con- 
sumed upon  the  altar.    As  for  the  flesh 


4S 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


fice  of  the  peace-offerings ;  and  the 
priest  shall  burn  them  upon  the 
altar,  iaccording  to  the  offerings 
made  bv  fire  unto  the  Lord  :  ^and 


or  bodies  of  this  and  the  foregoing  Sin- 
offering  of  the  rulers,  they  were  not, 
like  iliose  of  the  high  priest  and  the  con- 
gregation, burnt  without  the  camp,  but 
were  eaten  by  the  priests,  as  directed, 
Lev.  6.  26-30. 

Remarks. — (2.)  Sins  of  ignorance, 
though  of  less  guilt  than  sins  of  pre. 
sumption,  do  as  really  need  the  blood 
of  atonement,  and  as  truly  form  the 
matter  of  repentance,  as  any  others. 

(2.)  From  the  fact  that  greater  sacri- 
fices and  more  burdensome  rites  were 
appointed  for  the  priest  and  the  prince 
than  for  private  persons,  it  is  evident 
that  the  sins  of  some  men  are  of  a  more 
heinous  character,  more  scandalous  and 
pernicious,  than  those  of  others.  Per- 
sons  occupying  a  public  station,  which 
makes  them  conspicuous,  cannot  sin 
with  impunity,  however  it  may  be  with 
others. 

(13.)  As  there  might  be  among  the 
people  of  Israel  a  sin  of  the  whole  con- 
gregation, so  at  the  present  time  there 
may  be  a  sin  of  the  whole  nation,  which 
needs,  as  it  were,  a  national  atonement. 

(28.)  'If  his  sin  come  to  his  know- 
ledge.'  Whenever  conscience  charges 
upon  us  former  sins  committed,  whether 
against  God  or  man,  we  are  bound  to 
make  restitution,  though  years  may 
have  elapsed  since  the  event  occurred. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE   TRESPASS- OFFERING. 

The  original  word  for  Trespass-offer- 
ing is  tDCi^  dshdm,  from  a  root  of  the 
same  letters  Q:L"&^  dsham,  to  fail  in 
duty,  to  transgress,  to  be  guilty,  or,  as 
It  is  for  the  most  rendered  in  our  ver- 
sion to  trespass.  The  leading  idea  is 
plainly  that  of  guilt,  and  it  is  exten- 
sively admitted  by  lexicographers  that 


the  priest  shall  make  an  atonement 
for  his  sin  that  he  hath  committed, 
and  it  shall  be  forgiven  him. 

■  cli.  3.  5.     k  ver   2C,  31. 


the  degree  of  guilt  denoted  by  the  term 
is  greater  than  that  denoted  by  the  word 
i^tsn  ^lultd,  to  sin,  Irom  which  comes 
the  appropriate  term  for  sin-offerings. 

The  Trespass- offerings,  as  we  have 
already  remarked,  so  greatly  resembled 
the  Sin-offerings,  that  it  is  by  no  means 
easy  to  distinguish  between  them.  The 
occasions  on  which  they  were  offered 
were  much  the  same,  and  the  ceremo- 
nies much  t.he  same  also.  Indeed,  v/e 
sometimes  have  the  same  oblations 
called  interchangeably  Sin-offerings 
and  Trespass-offerings,  as  particularly 
Lev.  5.  6-S:  'And  he  shall  bring  his  treS' 
pass-offering  (1?2T!^  ashflino)  unto  the 
Lord  for  his  sin  which  he  hath  sinned, 
(Hi2n  "ir&5  iriJitsn  ^S"  al  'hatlatho  asher 
^hdtd)  a  female  from  the  flock,  a  lamb 
or  a  kid  of  the  goats,  for  a  sin-offering. 
And  if  he  be  not  able  to  bring  a  lamb, 
then  he  shall  bring  for  his  trespass uhich 
he  hath  committed  (i^tJn  "I'lL'S^  ^TZ'^iH 
ashdmo  asher  'hutd)  two  turtle-doves, 
or  two  young  pigeons,  unto  the  Lord  ; 
one  for  a  sin-offering  (nt^t^np  lehat' 
tdth)  and  the  other  for  a  burnt-offering.' 
Here  it  is  observable  that  the  offence 
committed  is  called  indifferently  a  sin 
smd  a  trespass,  and  the  sacrifice  offered, 
a  trespass-offering  and  a  sin-offering. 
Notwithstanding  this  there  were  marked 
points  of  difference  between  the  two. 
Sin-offerings  were  sometimes  offered  for 
the  whole  congregation  ;  Trespass-offer- 
ings never  but  for  particular  persons. 
Bullocks  were  sometimes  used  for  Sin- 
offerings,  never  for  Trespass-offerings. 
The  blood  of  the  Sin-offering  was  put 
on  the  horns  of  the  altar ;  that  of  the 
Trespass-offering  was  only  sprinkled 
round  about  the  bottom  of  the  altar. 
Still  we  are  left  in  ignorance  of  the  pre- 
cise nature  of  the  distinction,  or  for 
Avhat  reasons  the  law  in  one  case  pre- 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  V. 


49 


scribed  one,  and  in  another  the  other. 
Lightfoot,  guided  by  rabbinical  author- 
ity, mikes  the  difference  to  consist  in 
shis,  that  both  indeed  were  offered  for 
the  same  sort  of  transgressions,  but  the 
frt^  dshum,  or  trespass-offering  was  to 
be  offered  when  it  was  doubtful  whe- 
ther a  person  had  transgressed  or  not ; 
:i.s  for  instance,  suppose  that  he  had 
eaten  fat,  and  was  afterwards  in  doubt 
^vliether  it  was  the  fat  belonging  to  the 
muscular  flesh,  wliich  was  lawful  to  be 
e.iicn,  or  the  fat  of  the  inwards,  which 
was  unlawful  5  then  he  was  to  offer  an 
d'i^  (ishnm.  But  if  it  were  certain, 
•ind  he  knew  that  he  had  trespassed,  he 
must  offer  the  ni^t^n  ^hattddh,  or  sin-of- 
fering. Maimonides  is  of  opinion  that 
the  offences  for  which  the  tlTSi  dshdm 
was  offered  were  inferior  to  those  for 
wiiich  the  nj^t^n  ^hattddh  was  offered. 
Bochart,  on  the  other  hand,  and  we 
think  with  much  better  reason,  holds 
that  the  offences  expiated  by  C^i^ 
dshdm  were  more  grievous  than  those 
expiated  by  Hiit:!!  'hattudk.  Aben 
Ezra  makes  nj^tsn  'hattddh  to  signify 
a  sacrifice  offered  for  purging  offences 
committed  through  ignorance  of  the 
law  ;  t"i-K  dshdm  for  such  as  were 
committed  through  forgetfulness  of  it. 
Otliers  again  make  the  difference  to  be, 
that  the  ni^tsn  ^hattddh  was  for  offences 
proved  by  witnesses  ;  the  Q'i'i^  dshdm 
for  secret  faults  known  to  others  only 
by  the  offender's  confession.  But 
against  all  these  "hypotheses  very  spe- 
cious objections  may  be  urged,  and  it 
is  therefore  to  the  following  that  we 
are  disposed  to  give  the  preference. 

It  is  contended,  and  we  think  upon 
very  plausible  grounds,  by  several  dis- 
titiguished  critics,  that  the  class  of 
offences  to  which  the  word  QlTii  dshdm 
is  applied,  although  ultimately  com- 
mitted against  God,  were  yet  always, 
or  generally,  such  as  involved  an  injury 
towards  one's  neighbor ;  and  in  this 
sense  they  affirm  that  our  English  word 
trespass  is  its  most  suitable  representa- 
tive. It  is  certain,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
5 


that  most  of  the  offences  which  were  to 
be  expiated  by  the  Trespass-offering 
w^ere  of  this  character.  Indeed,  Outram, 
whose  authority  on  this  subject  is  per- 
haps  of  more  weight  than  that  of  any 
other  writer,  observes  that  in  all  cases 
where  the  Q"J;;!^%  dshdni  was  required, 
there  was  some  wrong  or  injury  done 
to  a  neighbor,  except  in  the  case  of  the 
Nazarile  defiled  by  the  dead,  Num. 
6.  12,  and  of  the  leper,  Lev.  14.  12. 
Still  we  cannot  positively  affinn  that 
this  is  the  designed  import  of  the 
term,  and  are  obliged  therefore  to  leave 
the  matter  enveloped  more  or  less  in 
that  cloud  of  obscurity  which,  as  we 
have  already  remarked  in  the  introduc- 
tion to  the  preceding  chapter,  rests  upon 
the  distinction  between  the  Sin  and  the 
Trespass-offering.  Thus  much  however 
is  clear,  that  the  class  of  offences  for 
which  the  Trespass-offering  was  to  be 
brouglit  included  those  which,  though 
not  amounting  to  wilful  and  presumptu- 
ous acts,  were  yet  usually  committed 
against  knowledge,  and  were  therefore 
of  a  higher  grade  of  guilt  than  the  sins 
of  mere  ignorance  and  infirmity  which 
were  contemplated  by  the  Sin-ofterings. 
Several  such  are  mentioned  in  the  com- 
mencement of  this  chapter,  viz.  the 
concealing  of  any  part  of  the  truth  by  a 
witness  properly  adjured  ;  the  touching 
any  unclean  person  or  thing ;  and  the 
swearing  rashly  that  he  would  do  what 
might  be  sinful,  or  what  he  might  not 
be  able  to  perform.  In  all  these  cases 
a  female  lamb  or  kid  was  to  be  offered, 
and  confession  made  of  guilt.  The 
ceremonies  of  oblation  were  precisely 
the  same  as  those  of  the  Sin-offering, 
except  that  the  blood,  instead  of  being 
put  upon  the  horns  of  the  altar,  was  to 
be  sprinkled  round  about  the  altar.  If 
the  offender  was  too  poor  to  give  a 
lamb,  he  was  to  bring  two  turtle-doves 
or  two  young  pigeons,  the  one  for  this 
particular  sin  wiiich  burdened  his  con- 
science, the  other  for  a  burnt-offering 
for  his  sins  in  general ;  making  expia- 
tion first  for  that  ia  which  he  had  more 


ao 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


immediately  offended.  If  even  this  was 
beyond  liis  means,  the  tenth  part  of  an 
ephah  of  flour,  or  about  five  pints,  might 
be  subsiiiutcd. 

Another  class  of  offences  to  which 
this  offering  }iad  reference,  was  that  in 
which  some  trespass  was  committed 
ignoranlly  or  undes«ignedly  against  the 
holy  tilings  of  the  Lord,  Lev.  5.  15  com- 
pared with  Lev. 22.  These  were  things 
dedicated  to  the  Lord  under  the  cere- 
monial law,  or  prescribed  or  prohibited 
by  its  rules,  and  were  very  numerous. 
Thus  if  one  had  unwittingly  kept  back 
any  of  the  required  offerings,  or  had 
eaten  witiiin  his  private  gates  the  tithes 
that  belonged  to  the  priests,  or  had 
failed  to  sanctify  the  firstlings  of  the 
males  ;  in  these  cases  he  was  to  bring 
as  a  Trespass-offering  a  ram  without 
blemish.  But  besides  this,  he  was  to 
make  restitution,  with  the  addition  of 
the  fifth  part,  according  to  the  estimate 
formed  by  the  priest.  Nay,  if  he  even 
only  suspected  that  he  had  offended  in 
any  of  these  holy  things,  he  was  to 
bring  the  ram  as  a  Trespass-offering, 
and  to  pay  the  estimated  value,  but 
without  the  addition  of  the  twenty  per 
cent. 

A  third  class  of  offences  were  those 
ol"  a  somewhat  deeper  dye — certain 
open  and  wilful  injuries  and  violaiioas 
of  law,  such  as  thefts,  violence,  false- 
swearing,  deceit  and  fraud.  '  If  a  soul 
sin  and  commit  a  trespass  against  tlie 
Lord,  and  lie  against  his  neighbor,  &c.' 
Thus  if  one  denied  what  liad  been  com- 
mitted to  his  trust,  or  dealt  fraudulently 
in  any  concern  of  partnership,  or  took 
any  thing  away  by  open  violence,  or 
secretly  deceived  his  neighbor  to  his 
loss,  or  denied  having  found  that  which 
was  lost ;  in  all  these  cases  the  delin- 
quent must  bring  a  ram  for  a  Trespass- 
offering,  and  must  pay  the  value,  esti- 
mated by  the  priest,  oi  the  injury  done, 
with  the  addition  of  the  fifth  part  there- 
of. Doing  thus,  it  was  said  that  <  the 
priest  should  make  an  atonement  for 
him  before  the  Lord,  and  it  should  be 


forgiven  him  for  any  thing  of  all  that 
he  haih  done  in  trespassing  llierein.' 

On  the  general  subject  of  the  Sin  and 
Trespass-offerings  we  may  remark, 
that  while  the  purpose  and  design  of 
these  various  ceremonies  have  been  dis- 
closed so  far  as  they  can  convey  moral 
or  spiritual  knowledge  to  oar  minds, 
there  is  doubtless  much  in  the  esternal 
forms  that  must  be  referred  to  the  sove- 
reign will  of  God.  No  other  satfsfac- 
lory  reason  can  be  assigned  for  the 
requirement  in  certain  cases  of  one  of 
these  species  of  offerings  rather  than 
another,  than  that  it  was  the  divine 
pleasure  so  to  have  it.  In  the  ordi- 
nances before  us  it  is  clear,  that  the 
wilful  sins  for  which  a  ram  was  the 
largest  offering  required,  were  greater 
than  those  infirmities  for  which  a  bul- 
lock  was  demanded.  If  the  atonement 
had  really  lain  in  the  type,  this  would 
have  borne  almost  an  appearance  of  in- 
justice. But  as  it  was  no  doubt  intend- 
ed by  every  kind  of  expiation  to  fix  the 
attention  upon  the  Great  Atonement 
thereafter  to  be  made  for  all  sin,  the 
intrinsic  value  of  the  particular  offering 
was  a  matter  of  comparatively  little 
importance.  Indeed  it  is  very  conceiv- 
able, as  we  have  already  remarked, 
that  a  sacrifice  of  less  value  may  have 
been  ordained  for  sins  of  greater  enor- 
mity with  tlie  express  purpose  of  con- 
veying the  intimation  that  the  atoning 
virtue  was  not  in  the  sacrifice,  but  in 
the  better  blood  which  was  to  be  shed 
at  a  future  day  on  Calvary.  Com|iared 
with  this  every  typical  prefiguration, 
even  the  most  costly  that  could  be  de- 
vised fell  so  infinitely  short  in  value, 
that  it  might  have  been  a  special  aim 
of  divine  wisdom  to  ordain  a  less  in 
order  the  more  forcibly  to  impress  up- 
on the  mind  the  intrinsic  inefiicacy  of 
a  greater. 

But  while  it  was  not  especially  im- 
portant for  the  worshipper  to  know  why 
one  animal  was  chosen  to  expiate  one 
sin,  and  another  another,  it  was  import* 
aat  for  him  to  know  that  for  every  par- 


B.C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  V. 


51 


CHAPTER  V. 
\  ND  if  a  soul  sin,  aand  hear  the 
•^^^  voice  of  swearing,  and  is  a 

'^  1  Kings  8.31.     Matt.  26.  63. 

ticular  sin  there  was  a  remedy  pro- 
vided I  so  that  no  man  need  incur  the 
divine  wrath,  either  by  reason  of  his 
most  secret  faults  or  his  most  flagrant 
violations  of  ilie  law.  This  is  the  very 
essence  ofgospel  truth.  No  sin,  not 
even  the  smallest  or  most  unintentional, 
could  be  forgiven  without  a  sacrifice. 
But  no  man  need  await  the  judicial 
punishment.  As  soon  as  he  knew  his 
fault,  or  suspected  it,  he  had  his  reme- 
dy. He  knew  what  he  was  to  do.  If 
he  did  it  not  the  condemnation  that  en- 
sued was  self-procured.  It  was  not  the 
fault  of  the  law,  nor  the  fault  of  the 
judge,  nor  the  fault  even  of  liis  own 
Kalural  weakness  or  infirmit)'^,  if  the 
evil  he  had  committed  was  not  forgiven 
him.  This  is  the  gospel.  Wliatever 
men  may  think  of  their  natural  condi- 
tion as  an  extenuation  of  their  sins  ; 
liowever  they  may  venture  to  impugn 
the  justice  that  assures  their  punish- 
ment ;  this  at  least  cannot  be  gain- 
sayed — the  remedy  is  provided  ;  the 
atonement  is  made  known  ;  the  mode 
of  making  it  personably  available  is 
clearly  stiitcd  ;  it  is  efficacious  for 
every  sin  ;  it  is  within  the  reach  of 
every  sinner.  Christ  by  his  one  obla- 
tion has  made  satisfaction  for  the  sins 
of  the  whole  world.  If  any  man  chooses 
to  abide  the  consequences  of  his  trans- 
j^ressions,  rather  tlian  seek  forgiveness 
in  the  way  prescribed,  the  condemna- 
tion is  his  own  deliberate  choice. 

Various  offences  of  Infirmity  or  Inad- 
vertence for  which  the  Trespass-offer- 
ing was  prescribed. 

?  — In  concealing  Knowledge.  \ 

I.  And  hear  the  voice  of  swearing. 

Heb.  n^S5  b^P  n>*?:iLn  veshameuh  kol  \ 

dlah,  and  hear  the  voice  of  adjuration,  [ 

execration,  or  oath.     That  is,  when  one  [ 


witness,  whether  he  hath  seen  or 
known  of  it. ;  if  he  do  not  utter  tt, 
then  he  shall  bbear  his  iniquity. 


"  ver.  17. 
and  20.  17 


ch.  7    18,  and  17.  10,  and  19.  S, 
Numb.  9.  13. 


is  adjured  or  put  upon  his  oath  as  a  wit- 
ness of  any  fact  whicli  is  brought  into 
legal  question.  Tiie  precept  does  not, 
it  would  seem,  relate  to  the  duty  of  in- 
Ibrming  against  a  common  profane 
swearer,  hut  to  the  case  of  one  who  is 
summoned  to  give  evidence  before  the 
civil  magistrate.  Judges,  auiong  the 
Jews,  had  power  to  adjure  not  only  the 
witnesses,  but  the  person  suspected 
(contrary  to  the  criminal  jurisprudence 
of  modern  times,  wliich  requires  no  man 
to  accuse  himself),  as  appears  from  the 
high  priest's  adjuring  our  Savior,  who 
thereupon  answered,  though  lie  had  be- 
fore been  silent,  Mat.  26.  63,  64.  So 
the  apostle  says,  1  Thess.  5.  27,  '  I 
charge  (adjure)  you  by  llie  Lord  that 
this  epistle  be  read  unto  all  the  holy 
brethren.'  Now  if  a  person  <  heard  tiie 
voice  of  swearing,'  i.  e.  if  he  were  ad- 
jured by  an  oath  of  the  Lord  to  testify 
what  he  knew  in  relation  to  atjy  matter 
of  fact  in  question,  and  yet  through  fear 
or  favor  refused  to  give  evidence,  or 
gave  it  but  in  part,  he  was  to  '  bear  his 
iniquity  ;'  i.  e.  to  bear  the  punishment 
of  liis  iniquity,  if  he  repented  not  and 
brought  not  tiie  appointed  sacrifices  It 
seems  to  be  implied  that  sucii  an  one 
should  be  considered  in  the  sight  of  God 
as  guilty  of  the  transgression  which  he 
has  endeavored  to  conceal,  as  may  be 
inferred  from  Prov.  29.  24,  '  Whoso  is 
partner  with  a  thief,  hateth  his  own 
soul :  he  heareth  cursing  and  bewrayeth 
it  not ;'  i.  e.  he  hears  the  words  of  the 
magistrate  adjuring  him,  and  binding 
his  soul  under  the  penally  of  a  '  curse' 
to  declare  the  whole  truth,  yet  he  '  be- 
wrayeth,'  or  uttereth  it  not ;  he  persists 
in  wickedly  stifling  his  evidence  and 
concealing  the  facts  ;  surely  such  an 
one  is  a  '  partner'  with  the  culprit,  and 
by  exposing  himself  to  the  consequences 


82 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  149a 


2  Or  cif  a  soul  touch  any  unclean  j 
thing,  whether  it  be  a  carcass  of  | 
an  unclean  beast,  or  a  carcass  of  j 
unclean  caitle,  or  the  carcass  of, 
unclean  creeping  things,  and  if  it 
be  hidden  from  him  ;  he  a4so  shall 
be  unclean,  and  <^guilty. 

3  Or  if  he  touch  cihe  uncleanness 

c  ch.  11.  24,  28,  31,  39.      Numb.  19    11,  13, 
16.     ti  ver  17.     «  ch.  12.  and  13.  and  i;5. 

of  thus  williholding  the  truth,  may  be 

jiisliy  said  to  '  hate  his  own  soul.' 

IT  And  is  a  witness.  The  Hebrew  can- 
ons speak  of  four  different  kinds  of 
oaths;  (1.)  The  oath  of  pronouncing  a 
thing  (of  which  see  v.  4)  ;  (2.)  Vain 
or  rash  oaths  (forbidden  Ex.  20.  7)  ; 
(3.)  the  oath  concerning  that  which 
was  delivered  to  keep  ;  (4.)  the  oath 
of  witness,  here  mentioned.  This  they 
explain  as  follows  ;  '  As  wlien  witnesses 
ciiu  give  testimony  concerning  goods, 
and  the  owner  rcquirelh  them  to  wit- 
ness, and  they  deny  that  they  can  give 
testimony,  and  swear  that  they  cannot, 
&,c.,  lor  such  an  oath  they  are  to  bring 
the  sacrifice    here   appointed.'  —  Mai' 

monides. IT  Whether  he  hath  seen  or 

known  of  it.  That  is,  whether  it  be  a 
matter  which  has  come  under  his  own 
personal  knowledge,  or  which  he  has 
learnt  from  the  information  of  others. 
The  spirit  of  the  precept  seems  to  re- 
quire a  voluntary  rendering  of  testimony 
when  it  was  known  that  information 
was  sought,  as  well  as  a  true  and  faith- 
ful declaration  when  summoned  by  le- 
gal process. IT  He  shall  bear  his  ini- 
quity. Heb.  y^[2^  i^rDl  venasd  avono. 
The  whole  clause  may  perhaps  be 
rendered,  '  If  he  do  not  utter  it,  and 
shall  bear  his  iniquity,'  i.  e.  shall  con- 
sequently remain  subject  to  the  wrath 
of  God,  and  liable  to  condign  punish- 
ment ;  implying  that  this  is  a  part  of 
the  sinful  condition  embraced  under 
the  hypothetic  particle  '  ?/,'  which  is 
not  an  improbable  sense.  And  so  in 
respect  to  the  final  clause  of  the  three 
ensuing   verses,  we  may  regard  it  as 


of  man,  whatsoever  uncleanness  it 
be  that  a  man  shall  be  defiled 
withal,  and  it  be  hid  from  him; 
when  he  knowelh  of  it,  then  he 
shall  be  guilty. 
4  Or  if  a  soul  swear,  pronouncing 
v/ith  his  lips  ho  do  evil,  or  gto  do 
good,  whatsoever  it  be  that  a  man 

f  See  1  Sam.  25.  22.     Acts  23.   12.     e  See 
Mark  6.  23. 


a  mere  continuation  of  the  conditional 
language  of  the  verse,  and  not  as  declar- 
ative of  the  divine  sentence  respecting 
the  offender.  This  declaration  or  ap- 
pointment is  reserved  to  the  olh  and  6th 
verses,  where  the  corresponding  duty  ib 
enjoined.  In  the  original  each  of  these 
clauses  is  introduced  by  tii';  particle 
'  and,'  which  would  seem  to  have  been 
improperly  omitted  by  our  own  and 
most  other  translators. 
2. — In  touching  an  unclean  Thing. 

2.  If  a  soul  touch  any  unclean  thing, 
whether  it  be,  ^-c.  Tliat  is,  either  the 
dead  body  of  a  clean  animal,  or  the 
living  or  dead  body  of  an  unclean  crea- 
ture.  All  such  persons  were  required 
to  wash  themselves  and  their  clothes  in 
clean  water,  and  were  considered  as 
unclean  until  evening.  Lev.  11.  8,24.31. 

IT  If  it  be  hidden  from  him.     That 

is,  if  he  be  not  aware  of  the  uncleanness 
which  he  has  contracted,  and  goes  on 
to  do  those  things  which  he  would  not 
be  at  liberty  to  do,  provided  he  were 
conscious  of  his  defilement,  such  as  en- 
tering the  tabernacle  or  eating  of  holy 
things,  then  when  he  comes  to  be  ac- 
quainted with  the  fact  he  shall  look 
upon  himself  as  *  unclean,' just  as  if  he 
knowingly  touched  the  unclean  thing, 
and  consequently  excluded  from  divine 
worship  till  he  had  offered  the  sacrifice 
appointed  v.  6. 

3. — In  touching  an  unclean  Person. 

3.  Or  if  he  touch  the  uncleanness,  ^c. 
These  different  kinds  of  uncleanness 
are  afterwards  specified  in  detail,  Lev. 
11-15,  where  see  Notes. 


B.C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  V. 


53 


shall  pronounce  with  an  oath,  and  i  be  guilty  in  one  of  these  things^ 
it  be  hid  from  him;  when  he  know-  that  he  shall  ^confess  that  he  hath 
eth  of  it,  then  he  shall  be  guilty  sinned  in  that  thing: 
in  one  af  these. 
5  And  it  shall  be,  when  he  shall 


4. — In  taking  a  rash  Oath. 
A.  If  a  soul  swear,  pronouncing  with 
his  lips,  ^-c.  That  is,  when  a  man 
swears  raslily  that  he  will  or  will  not 
do  such  and  such  a  thing,  as  David,  that 
he  would  kill  Nabal  ;  Jeplhah,  that  he 
would  sacrifice  to  the  Lord  whatsoever 
should  meet  him  coming  out  of  his 
doors,  &c.  The  original  word  5<t3D 
bcltd,  rendered  pronounce,  has  the  im- 
port of  rashly,  inconsiderately,  or  fool- 
ishly uttering  any  thing,  as  may  be 
seen,  Ps.  106.  33,  where  it  is  said  of 
Moses  I  hat '  he  spake  unadvisedly  (Heb. 
t^tjD"'  yehatta)  with  his  lips.'  So  Pro  v. 
12.  18, 'There  is  that  speaketh  (Heb. 
fcitOl  bote,  speaketh  rashly)  like  the 
piercings  of  a  sword.'  Thus  also  Num. 
30.  6,  8,  the  phrase  '  uttered  ought  with 
her  lips,'  is  in  Heb.  i-:;t2Il?2  mibta,  the 
rash  or  incautious  utterance  of  the  lips. 
From  the  Heb.  root  is  probably  formed 
the  Gr.  /Surros  battos,  and  (ia-Tu\oyia 
baltologia,  rash,  vain,  heedless  speaking, 
which  occurs  Mat.  6.  7,  'But  when 
ye  pray  use  not  vain  repetitions  (Gr. 
pa-To\<iyia  battologiu)  as  the  heathens 
do  ;'  i.  e.  do  not  indulge  in  rash  or  in- 
considerate professions  ;  speak  not  un- 
advisedly lo  your  Maker  in  prayer, 
either  in  making  vows  or  promises, 
whatever  may  be  the  warmth  of  your 
devotions.  The  import  of  the  precept 
is  doubtless  the  same  as  that  contained 
Eccl.5.2.  '  Be  not  rash  with  liiy  iiiouth, 
and  let  not  thine  heart  be  hasty  lo  utter 
any  thing  before  God.'  The  present 
rendering,  '  vain  repetitions,'  does  not 
seem  to  be  warranted  by  sufficient  au- 
thority.— As  to  the  law  itself,  *  it  served 
very  eiTectually,'  says  Michaelis,  '  to 
maintain  the  honor  of  oaths,  inasmuch 
as  every  oath,  liowever  inconsiderate, 
or  unlawful,  or  impossible,   was  con- 


h  ch.  16.21.  and  :26.  40. 
10.  11,  12. 


Numb.  5.  7.    Ezra 


sidered  so  far  obligatory,  that  it  was 
necessary  to  expiate  its  non-fulfilment 
j  by  an  offering  ;  and  it  was  at  the  same 
time,  the  best  possible  means  of  wean- 
ing the  people  from  rash  oaths,  because 
the  man  who  had  become  addicted  to 
that  unbecoming  practice,  would  find 
himself  too  frequently  obliged  either  to 
keep  his  oaths,  how  great  soever  the 
inconvenience,  or  else  to  make  offerings 
for    their    atonement.' — Comment,    on 

Laws  of  Moses,  v.  4,  p.  111. IT  And 

it  be  hid  from  him.  It  supposes  that  he 
did  not  rightly  understand  or  duly  con- 
sider the  circumstances  of  his  swearing, 
as  whether  the  object  were  lawful,  or 
the  performance  of  it  in  his  power.  If 
these  matters  were  '  hidden  from  him,' 
or  he  was  not  properly  aware  of  them, 
he  was  bound  to  atone  for  the  hastiness 
and  rashness  of  his  oath  by  a  sacrifice. 

^  Then  he  shall  be  guilty  in  one  of 

these.  Rather,  '  and  he  shall  be  guilty 
in  one  of  these,'  i.  e.  one  of  the  three 
cases  above  propounded. 

5.   When  he  shall  be  guilty  in  one  of 

these  things.    That  is,  in  one  of  the  four 

j  sins  just  mentioned.     The  words  seem 

to  be  merely  a  repetition  of  the  final 

I  clause    of    the     preceding    verse. 

j  IT    Shall  confess.      At   the   same  time 

!  laying  his  hands  on  the  head  of  the  vie- 

j  tim,  in  token  of  his  faith   in   the  great 

j  atoning  sacrifice.     The  offering  was  not 

I  acceptable  unless  accompanied  with  a 

penitential  confession,  and  an  humble 

prayer   for   pardon.     The   form  of  the 

confession   was  substantially  this:   'I 

I  have  sinned  ;   I   have  dune  iniquity;  I 

;  have  trespassed,  and  have  done  thus  and 

thus  •  and  do  return  my  repentance  before 

ihee  ;  and  with  this  1  make  atonement.' 

The    animal   was   then    considered    to 

bear  vicariously  the  sins  of  the  persoa 

who  brought  it. 


5$ 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


6  And  he  shall  bring  his  trespass- 
offering  unto  the  Lord  for  his  sin 
•which  he  hath  sinned,  a  female 
from  the  flock,  a  lamb  or  a  kid  of 
the  goals,  for  a  sin-offering;  and 
the  priest  shall  make  an  atonement 
for  him  concerning  his  sin. 

6.  He  shall  bring  his  trespass-offering. 
Heb.  I^^Ti*  ashdmo,  which  may  be  ren- 
dered guilt-offering,  as  ihe  original 
t'lTJ^  asham  properly  signifies  guilti- 
ness or  trespass,  just  as  the  word  ren- 
dered ''  sin-offering,'  ch.  4,  literally  sig- 
nifies sin  or  traiisgression.  The  one  as 
well  as  the  other  pointed  to  Christ,  of 
whom  it  is  said,  Is.  53.  10,  '  Thou  shall 
make  his  soul  an  offering  for  sin  (D"^!^ 
asham,  a  guilt  or  trespass-offering).' 
^  The  priest  shall  make  an  atone- 
ment for  him.  As  the  atonement  was 
not  accepted  without  his  repentance,  so 
his  repentance  would  not  justify  him 
without  the  atonement.  In  regard  to 
the  excellent  uses  of  this  feature  of  the 
general  system  of  Levitical  laws,  we 
cite  the  remarks  of  Prof.  Palfrey  : — '  If 
an  offence  were  committed  in  ignorance, 
the  offender,  it  is  true,  would  not  be 
culpable,  except  for  having  neglected 
to  inform  himself  concerning  the  char- 
acter of  his  act.  But  his  sin  done  una- 
wares might  injure  his  neighbor  as  much 
as  if  it  had  been  committed  against 
light ;  and  society  is  interested  in  pre- 
venting that  ignorance  of  the  law  among 
its  members  which  allows  them  to  do 
it  harm.  He  who  had  unintentionally 
transgressed  a  law,  then,  being  called 
on,  as  soon  as  he  came  to  know  the  ille- 
gality of  what  had  been  done,  to  put 
himself  to  expense  because  of  it,  found 
himself  addressed  by  a  motive  to  avoid 
such  a  mistake  in  future  ;  in  other 
words,  to  acquaint  himself  wii^h  the  law. 
The  presumptuous  offender  was  pun- 
ished, in  the  form  of  a  Sin  or  Trespass- 
offering,  by  a  fine,  by  which  he  '  made 
atonement,' just  as  in  our  daj',  a  man 
has  made  his  atonement,  or  his  recon- 
ciliation, with  the  society  whose  laws 


7  And  iif  he  be  not  able  to  bring 
a  lamb,  then  he  shall  bring  for  his 
trespass  which  he  hath  committed, 
two  kiurile-doves,  or  two  young 
pigeons,  unto  the  Lord;  one  for  a 

'  ch.  12.  8.  and  14.  21.     k  ch.  1.  14. 


he  has  violated,  when  he  has  served  out 
the  time  of  l)is  sentence  in  prison,  or 
paid  the  prescribed  pecuniary  penalty. 
To  a  man  who  liad  offended  witliout 
detection,  except  by  his  own  conscience, 
the  system  would  have  an  admirable 
application.  Ii  would  never  suffer  his 
conscience  to  sleep,  till  he  had  informed 
against  himself.  It  would  be  perpetu- 
ally addressing  him  with  the  offer  to 
restore  him  to  a  fair  standing,  and  to 
self-respect,  as  soon  as  he  would  come 
forward,  avow  his  offence,  present  his 
offering,  or  (to  phrase  it  differently) 
pay  his  fine,  and  make  restitution  to 
those  whom  he  had  injured,  if  the  case 
was  such,  as  to  admit  of  this  being 
done.  And,  once  more,  the  system  was 
of  excellent  influence  in  putting  llie  le- 
gal penalty  of  fine  in  the  form  of  a  re- 
ligious offering.  The  wrong-doer,  while 
he  gave  satisfaction  to  the  slate,  and 
paid  the  fine  of  his  delinquency,  was 
thus  reminded,  that  it  was  not  only 
against  the  state  that  he  had  offended, 
and  was  at  the  same  time  made  to  ex- 
press the  penitence  of  his  heart  to  God.' 
— Led. on  Jew.  Antiq.  vol.  ],p.  250. 

7.  And  if  he  be  not  able  to  bring  a 
lamb.  Heb.  nr  "^l  11^  3?":i:^  1*3  t&^  im 
lo  taggia  yudo  dt  seh,  if  his  hand  reach 
not  to  the  svffciency  (or  value)  of  a 
lamb.  This  was  ordained  that  the 
means  of  atonement  might  be  within 
the  ability  of  all  classes.  In  reference 
to  these  offerings,  Maimonides  says, 
'  If  a  poor  man  brought  the  oblation  of 
the  rich,  he  was  accepted;  but  if  the 
rich  brought  the  oblaiion  of  the  poor, 
he  was  not  accepted.'  Pigeons  were  so 
plenteous  in  Palestine  and  the  neigh- 
boring  countries,  that  he  must  have  oeen 
poor  indeed,  who  could  not  afford  a  pair. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  V. 


55 


sin-offerinf^,  and  the  other  for  a 
ournt-offering. 
S  And  he  shall  bring  them  unto 
the  priest,  who  shall  offer  thai 
which  is  for  the  sin-otfering  first, 
and  Uvring  off  his  head  from  his 
neck,  but  shall  not  divide  iL  asun- 
der : 

9  And  he  shall  sprinkle  of  the 
blood  of  the  sin-offering  upon  the 
side  of  tiie  altar;  and  '"the  rest  of 
the  blood  shall  be  wrung  out  at 
the  bottom  of  the  altar :  it  z5  a  sin- 
offering. 

10  And  he  shall  offer  the  second 

I  c!i.  1.  15.     m  ch.  4.  7,  IS,  30,  34. 


Adrichomius,  the  traveler,  tells  us  that 
there  was  a  single  lower  to  tiie  south 
of  Jerusalem,  in  which  5000  doves 
nestled.  Maundrell  also  remarks  of 
Kefteen,  in  Syria,  that  '  the  adjacent 
fields  abounding  wilh  corn  give  the  in- 
habitants great  advantage  for  breeding 
pigeons,  insomuch  that  you  here  find 
more   dove-cotes    than    other  houses.' 

IT  One  for  a  sin-offering,  and  the 

other  for  a  burnt-offering ;  it  being 
necessary  for  the  sinner  first  to  have 
his  peace  made  wilh  God  by  the  sin- 
ofTering,  in  order  to  have  his  burnt-of- 
fering or  gift  accepted. 

S.  Wring  off  his  head.  Rather  '  pinch 
or  nip  the  head  with  the  nail,' as  ex- 
plained in  the  Note  on  Lev.  1.  15.  It 
does  not  appear  that  the  head  was  to 
be  quite  separated  from  the  body. 

10.  According  to  the  manner.  Heb. 
tjSlL'^OlD  kammishpat,  according  to  the 
judgment,  i.  e.  according  to  the  ordi- 
nance or  statute ;  the  original  term 
tiiD'I^'O  mishpdt  being  used  to  signify 
the  prescribed  mode  of  doing  any  thing, 
particular   in   the  matter   of  religious 

services. IT    For    his    sin.      Heb. 

ins^tsn?^  mVhattatho,  from  his  sin ; 
1.  e.  cleansing  him  from  it. 

11.  Btit  if  he  be  not  able  to  bring  tico 
turtle-doves.  The  kind  consideration 
of  the  ability  and  circumstances  of  the 
offenderj  which  distinguishes  all  these 


for  a  burnt-offering,  according  to 
the  "manner:  oand  the  priest  shall 
make  an  atonement  for  him  for  his 
sin  which  he  hath  sinned,  and.it 
shall  be  forgiven  him. 

11  H  But  if  he  be  not  able  to  bring 
two  turtle-doves,  or  two  young  pi- 
geons;  then  he  that  sinned  shall 
bring  lor  his  offering  the  tenth  part 
of  an  cphah  of  fine  flour  for  a  sin- 
offering;  qhe  shall  put  no  oil  upon 
it,  neither  shall  he  put  any  frank- 
incense thereon  :  for  it  is  a  sin-of- 
fering. 

12  Then  shall  he  bring  it  to  the 

"  ch.  1.  14.     och.  4.  26.     p  Numb.  5.  15. 


statutes,  appears  very  conspicuous  here. 
If  any  one  were  so  impoverished  that 
even  an  offering  of  tv;o  or  three  birds 
were  not  easily  within  his  reach,  then  a 
slight  oblation  of  flwur  was  acceptable 
in  its  stead.  But  while  we  admire  the 
graciousness  of  heaven  in  this  respect, 
let  us  not  fail  to  observe  that  the  offence 
was  invariably  to  be  followed  by  5om« 
kind  of  atonement,  in  order  to  generate 
habits  ol'  the  utmost  vigilance  and  cir- 
cumspection in  all  their  deportment. 
'  God  may  be  represented,'  says  R.  Levi, 
'  as  declaring  in  this  precept.  It  is  not 
my  will  that  such  things  should  be  done  ; 
but  if  any  man  commit  them  through 
frailty,  let  him  repent  heariily,  and 
keep  a  stricter  guard  over  himself  in 
future.  Let  him  offer  sacrifices  which 
may  serve  to  imprint  the  remembrance 
of  his  guilt  on  his  mind,  and  likewise 
to  prevent  him  from  offending  again.' 
The  prescribed  offering  in  this  case  was 
the  tenth  part  of  an  ephah  of  fine  flour, 
or  about  three  quarts,  as  the  ephah  con- 
tained a  little  more  than  seven  gallons 
and  a  half.  This  was  to  be  offered 
without  oil,  not  only  because  that  would 
make  it  too  costly  for  the  poor,  but  be- 
cause it  was  a  sin-oflering,  and  there, 
fore  to  show  the  loathsomeness  of  the 
sin  for  which  it  was  offered,  it  must  not 
be  grateful  either  to  the  taste  by  oil,  or 
to  the  smell  by  frankincense. 


56 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


priest,  and  the  priest  shall  take  his 
handful  of  it,  q  even  a  memorial 
thereof,  and  burn  it  on  the  aliar, 
^according  to  the  offerings  made 
by  fire  unto  the  Lord  :  it  is  a  sin- 
offering. 

13  sAnd  the  priest  shall  make  an 
atonement  for  him  as  touching  his 
sin  that  he  hath  sinned  in  one  of 
these,  and  it  shall  be  forgiven  him : 
and  t  the  remnant  shall  be  the 
priest's,  as  a  meat-offering. 

14  ^  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

15  ulf  a  soul  commit  a  trespass, 
and  sin  through  ignorance,  in  the 
holy  things  of  the  Lord  ;  then  "he 

n  ch.  2.  2.  r  ch.  4.  35-  s  ch.  4.  26.  '  ch. 
2.  3.     '-"  ch.  22.  14.     ^  Ezra  10.  19. 


12.  Shall  take  his  handful  of  it. 
Heb.  12?:p  aa'^'n  r.^f2  V?:p  kametz 
mimmenu  melo  kamtzo,  shall  grasp  of 
it  the  fulness  of  his  grasping.  This 
was  peculiar  to  all  the  meat-offerings, 
that  a  handful  as  a  memorial  should  be 
burnt  on  the  altar,  while  the  remainder 
was  eaten  by  the  priests,  except  in  the 
case  of  the  priests'  own  ofierings  of  this 
kind,  which  were  all  burnt,  as  appears 

from  Lev.  6.  16,22,23. TT  According 

to  the  offerings.    See  Note  on  Lev.  4.  35. 

13.  In  one  of  these.  That  is,  by  one 
of  these  three  before  mentioned  sacri- 
fices, either  that  of  a  lamb,  or  of  two 
turtle-doves  or  young  pigeons,  or  of 
fine  flour,  Rashi  observes  that  as  there 
were  three  classes  of  men,  the  rich,  the 
poor,  and  the  very  poor ;  so  there  are 
three  kinds  of  offerings  prescribed  in 
this  chapter,  adapted  to  the  circum- 
stances of  these  several  classes. 

5. — For  a  Trespass  committed  through 
Ignorance. 

14.  J/  a  soul  commit  a  trespass.  Heb. 
'^^f2  ^y?2n  timal  maal,  trespass  a  tres- 
pass. The  original  word  is  different 
from  that  which  has  hitherto  been  ren- 
dered  trespass,  and  has  mainly  the  im- 


shall  bring  for  his  trespass  unto  the 
Lord  a  ram  without  blemish  out 
of  the  flocks,  with  thy  estimation 
by  shekels  of  silver,  after  ythe  she- 
kel of  the  sanctuary,  for  a  trespass- 
offering  : 

16  And  he  shall  make  amends  for 
the  harm  that  he  hath  done  in  the 
holy  thing,  and  zshall  add  the  fifth 
part  thereto,  and  give  it  unto  the 
priest ;  aand  the  priest  shall  make 
an  atonement  for  him  with  the  ram 
of  the  trespass-offering,  and  it  shall 
be  forgiven  him. 

17  If  And  if  a  ^soul  sin,  and  com- 
mit any  of  these  things  which  arc 
forbidden  to  be  done  by  the  com- 

y  Exod.  30.  13.  ch.  27  25.  z  ch.  6.  5.  and 
22.  14.  and  27.  13,  15,  27,  31.  Numb.  5.  7. 
a  ch.  4.  26.     b  ch.  4.  2- 


port  of  prevaricating  or  dealing  fraud- 
ulenlly,  especially  in  matters  of  religion. 

IT  In  the  holy  things  of  the  Lord. 

As  for  instance  by  not  paying  his  full 
tithes  J  by  neglecting  to  consecrate  or 
redeem  the  first  born  ;  by  appropriating 
to  his  own  use  the  first-fruits  j  or  by 
eating  any  of  those  parts  of  the  sacrifice 
which  pertained  to  the  priests.  This 
•was  di  trespass  ;  an  offence  which  it  is 
here  supposed  might  be  done  througli 
mistake,  forgetfulness,  or  want  of  care 
or  zeal ;  for  if  it  were  done  presumptu- 
ously, in  contempt  of  the  law,  the 
offender  died  without  mercy,  Heb.  10. 

28. IT  With  thine  estimation.     Or, 

'  with  thy  valulation.'  That  is,  with 
so  much  money  as  should  be  an  ade- 
quate satisfaction  for  the  wrong  done  to 
the  priest.  This  estimation  was  to  be 
made  by  the  priest,  as  appears  from 
Lev.  27.  S,  12.  Or  it  may  mean,  as  the 
ancient  versions  generally  understood 
it,  that  the  ram  should  be  at  least  of  the 
value  of  two  shekels,  the  plural  for  tho 
dual. IF  After  the  shekel  of  the  sanc- 
tuary.   See  Note  on  Ex.  30.  13. 

6.— The  Doubtful  Trespass. 
17.  If  a  soul  sin,  ^c.     In  order  s»ll 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  V. 


m 


mandments  of  the  Lord  ;  c  though  |  priest   shall  make  an   atonement 
le  wisi  ?7   not,  yet  is  he  ''guilty,  {  lor  him  concerning  his   ignorance 


and  shall  bear  his  iniquity 

IS  eAnd  he  shall  bring  a  ram 
without  blemish  out  of  the  flock, 
with  ihy  esiimation,  for  a  trespass- 
oflering  unto  the  priest ;  ^and  the 


■■  ver.  15.     ch.  4    L',  13,  22,  27.     Ps 
Luke  1-2.  4S.    ■'  ver.  1.  '2.    "^  ver.  15.    i 


19.  12. 
ver   li). 


more  effectually  to  deter  the  chosen 
race  from  all  irreverence  towards  any 
thing  peculiarly  dedicated  to  God  and 
his  service,  it  is  here  enacted,  that  if 
any  one  sinned  in  regard  to  tlie  use  of 
things  which  lie  only  suspected  to  be 
sacred — about  which  he  was  left  in  sus- 
pense  wliether  he  had  offended  or  not — 
even  in  this  case,  that  he  might  be  sure 
of  being  on  the  safe  side,  he  was  to 
bring  his  ram  as  a  tresspasser,  and  pay 
the  value  of  the  thing  according  to  the 
priest's  estimation,  as  ordered  v.  15, 
only  with  this  difference,  that  the  addi- 
tional jjrescribed  fifth  -part  was  here  to 
be  dispensed  with,  inasmuch  as  there 
■was  some  uncertainty  whether  he  had 
actually  transgressed  or  no.  It  would 
perhaps  seem,  from  the  letter  of  the 
two  passages,  that  the  case  here  men- 
tioned was  the  same  with  that  in  the 
preceding  ch.,  v.  27,  yet  the  diflferent 
offerings  prescribed  seem  to  preclude 
this  idea.  In  tlie  formsrcase  the  sacri- 
fice appointed  was  a  kid  of  the  goats  or 
a  female  lamb  ;  but  in  the  present,  an 
unblemished  ram  was  prescribed.  The 
previous  passage,  moreover,  is  to  be 
understood  of  moral  prohibitions,  of 
things  concerning  others :  this  on  the 
other  hand,  has  respect  to  ceremonial 
precepts  touching  sacrifices  or  other 
things  pertaining  to  divine  worship. 

Reimarks. — (1.)  We  are  not  to  ac- 
count our  duty  discharged  merely  by 
avoiding  sin  ourselves;  we  are  bound  to 
use  our  utmost  endeavors  to  prevent  it 
m  others,  and  not  to  shrink  from  the 
responsibility  or  odium  of  bearing  pub- 
lic testimony  against  it.     Especially 


wherein  he  erred   and  wist  it  not, 
and  it  shall  be  forgiven  him. 

19  It  IS  a  trespass-olfering:  she 
hath  certainly  trespassed  against 
the  Loud. 

s  Ezra  10-  2. 


does  this  apply  to  such  sins  as  brought 
dislionor  upon  the  holy  name  of  God. 
A  man  may  be  patient  in  regard  to 
'  wrongs  done  to  himself,  but  not  in  regard 
to  those  that  are  done  to  the  Most  High. 

(5.)  '  Shall  confess  that  he  hath  sin- 
ned in  that  thing.'  Confession  of  sin, 
in  order  to  be  acceptable,  must  be  par- 
ticular. Such  was  David's  confession  ; 
'I  have  done  this  evil;'  and  such 
Achan's.  It  is  not  enough  to  rest  in 
generals. 

(7.)  '  If  he  be  not  able  to  bring  a 
lamb.'  It  is  not  the  greatness  of  the 
gift  but  the  heart  of  the  giver,  which 
God  regards. 

(16.)  '  Shall  make  amends.'  Re- 
pentance for  wrong  done  to  our  neighbor 
is  incomplete  unless  accompanied  by 
restitution. 

(IS.)  '  The  priest  shall  make  atone- 
ment for  him.'  The  great  Christian 
doctrine  that  to  the  atonement  alone  we 
owe  all  our  pardon  and  peace,  is  here 
prominently  set  forth.  Contrition,  con- 
fession, restitution,  all  the  feelings 
which  accompany,  and  all  the  works 
which  are  meet  for  repentance,  are  in- 
dispensable ;  but  it  is  failh  in  the  atone- 
ment of  Christ  which  justifies.  Upon 
that  alone  must  the  penitent's  hope  be 
placed.  While  he  weeps  tears  of  grief 
and  shame,  while  he  renounces  all  his 
evil  ways,  while  he  strives  to  undo  all 
the  evil  which  he  has  previously  done, 
the  sacrifice  of  Christ  must  be  looked  to 
as  the  only  meritorious  cause,  as  the 
only  appointed  method  of  mercy.  For 
this  his  earnest  application  must  be 
made ;  without  this  his  professed  re« 
pentance  will  avail  him  nothing. 


58 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  MOO. 


CHAPTER  VI.  ]  trespass  against  the  Lord,  and  b  He 

AND  the  LoiiD  spake  unto  Mo-  I  unio  his  neighbour  in  thai  c  which 
ses,  saying, 
2  If  a  soul  sin,  and  »  commit  a 


Numb.   0.   G- 


was  delivered  him  to  keep,  or  in 

Acts  5.  4.  Col.  3.  9.    .•  Esod. 


'■ch.  19.  11 
2-2.  7.  10. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

The  Trespass-offering  for  sins  of  Injus- 
tice, Fraud,  Robbery,  False-Dealing, 

2.  If  a  soul  sin  and  commit  a  trespass. 

Gr.  -iioi^Mv  -apif]i)  rai  ivroXas  Kt'piwi', 
despising  shall  despise  the  command- 
ments of  the  Lord.  In  the  Heb.  the 
phraseology  is  the  same  as  in  ch.  5.  15. 
It  may  here  be  remarked,  that  the  first 
seven  verses  of  tiiis  chapter  are  in  the 
original  embraced  within  the  preceding 
chapter,  to  which,  perhaps,  they  more 

properly  belong. IT  Against  the  Lord. 

Although  all  the  inslanoes  specified  re- 
late to  our  neighbor,  yet  it  is  called 
a  trespass  against  the  Lord,  because 
though  the  injury  be  done  immediately 
to  a  fellow  creature,  yet  an  afl'ront  is 
thereby  given  to  the  Most  High,  whose 
authority  has  forbidden  the  wrong,  and 
who  has  made  the  command  of  loving 
our  neighbor   second   only   to  that  of 

loving  himself. IT  That  which  was 

delivered  him  to  keep.  Heb.  "^I^ipi: 
pikkadon.  '  From  the  present  text  we 
learn,  incidentally,  that  when  a  person 
denied  that  he  had  received  a  deposit, 
and  no  proof  of  his  having  done  so  could 
be  adduced,  he  was  obliged  to  lake  an 
oath  to  that  effect:  but  if  he  swore 
falsely,  and  afterwards  repented  of  hav- 
ing done  so,  the  sin-offering  and  restitu- 
tion to  the  injured  party  afforded  him 
an  opportunity  of  atonement,  without 
incurring  the  extent  of  punishment  to 
which  he  would  have  been  liable  had 
the  crime  been  judicially  proved.  The 
law  is  too  distinctly  announced  in  Exod. 
22.  to  require  enlarged  remark  ;  but  as 
an  important  distinction  concerning  a 
deposited  beast  injured,  or  stolen  from 
the  person  with  whom  it  was  deposited, 
IS  liable  to  escape  notice,  as  stated  in 


vv.  9-11  of  that  chapter,  we  may  ob- 
serve, that  if  the  animal  were  stolen,  or 
inet  with  an  accident,  when  out  at  pas- 
ture, the  depositary  was  allowed  to 
clear  himself  by  oath,  and  then  the 
owner  had  no  claim  upon  him  ;  but  if  it 
were  stolen  from  his  own  premises,  he 
was  obliged  to  make  restitution.  This 
was  obviously  on  the  princijde  of  its 
being  more  difficult  to  steal  a  beast 
from  a  house  than  any  thing  else  ;  and 
that  as  he  might  have  liad  the  jirofit 
arisins  from  the  use  of  it,  so  li«  ought 
to  bear  the  loss  arising  from  his  neglect 
in  looking  after  it,  or  from  accidtMit — 
which  is  of  more  rare  occurrence,  and 
often  difficult  to  distinguish  from  neg- 
lect (see  Michaelis,  vol.  2.  p.  375). 
The  importance  of  dislincl  regulations 
on  tlie  subject  of  deposited  pi(ij>erly, 
has  been  strongly  felt  by  all  Oriental 
legislators ;  and  it  proceeds  from  the 
fact  that  there  were  not  at  any  time, 
and  are  not  now,  any  of  those  responsi- 
ble banking  establishments  which  in 
modern  Europe  aff'ord  such  imj)ortant 
facilities  for  the  application,  transfer, 
and  security  of  properly.  Hence,  when 
a  man  is  apprehensive  of  oppression  or 
robbery,  or  from  another  cause,  wishes 
to  secure  liis  properly,  he  has  no  other 
alternative  than  either  to  liide  it  in 
some  place  of  concealment,  or  to  put  it 
in  the  hands  of  some  irrrsponsible  per- 
son, in  whom  he  thinks  he  has  cause  to 
rely.  So  also,  if  a  man  wishes  to  leave 
his  place  of  residence  for  a  time,  he 
must  either  adopt  one  of  these  courses, 
or  else,  perhaps  at  a  great  sacrifice, 
turn  his  property  into  money  or  jewels, 
and  take  it  with  him,  exposing  it  to  all 
the  dangers  of  the  road  ;  which,  in  the 
East,  are  very  imminent  and  great. 
Much  risk  attends  all  these  alternatives. 
For  individuals  to  prove  unfaithful  to 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  VI. 


59 


fellowship,   or   in   a    thing   taken  ,  these    that  a  man  doeth,  sinning 

away  by  violence,  or  hath  ^  deceiv-  j  therein  : 

4  Then  it  shall  be,  because  he 
hath  sinned  and  is  guilty,  that  he 
shall  restore  that  which  he  took 
violently  away,  or  the  thing  which 
he  hath  deceitfully  gotten,  or  that 
which  was  delivered  him  to  keep, 
or  the  lost   thing  which  he  found, 

that  which  is  delivered  to  keep,  render- 
ed in  the  Gr.  KapaOnvn^  and  occurring 
2  Tim.  ].  12,  '  I  am  persuaded  ihat  he  is 
al)le  to  keep  that  which  I  have  commit- 
ted tir.to  him  (-aonQrjKr])  against  that 
day,'  So  again,  2  Tim,  1.  14,  <  That 
good  thing  which  was  committed  unto 
thee  (rrapadnKn),  keep.'  1  Tim.  6.  20, 
'  O  Timothy,  keep  that  which  is  com- 
mitted  to  thy  trust  (jiaoaOrjKr}).'  •  — 
tr  Or  in  n  thing  taken  by  violence.  Le 
Clerc  lightly  observes,  that  this  signi- 
fies a  case  of  extortion  by  f<irce,  where 
there  was  no  witness  at  liand  who  could 
give  evidence  before  the  judge  for  the 
person  robbed.  The  laws,  therefore, 
Ex.  22.  7,  15,  appear  to  refer  to  cases 
where  the  tiling  could  be  proved ;  but 
here  to  those  in  which  the  person  in- 
jured could  bring  no  proof  against  the 

offender. IT    Or    hath    deceived   his 

neighbor.  Heb.  p'lZJS^  cisak,  hath  deceit- 
fully or  fraudulently  oppressed.  That 
is,  wronged  him  by  false  accusation,  or 
any  unjust  means,  especially  by  with- 
holding what  was  due,  or  extorting  wliat 
was  not.  Of  this  sin  Zaccheus  cleared 
himself  by  a  fourfold  restitution,  Luke 
19.  8.  '  Who,'  says  Maimonides,  '  is  a 
deceitful  oppressor  ?  He  that  hath  his 
neighbor's  goods  in  his  hand,  with  the 
owner's  consent,  and  when  they  are  de- 
manded again,  he  keeps  the  goods  in  his 
own  hands  by  force,  and  returns  them 
not  V 

4.  He  shall  restore,  SfC.  It  appears 
from  Num.  5.  6,  7,  that  confession  of 
the  sin  was  required  in  this  and  all  sim- 
ilar instances  of  ires])ass.  It  is  to  be 
recollected  that  by  a  previous  law,  Ex. 
22.  1,  7,  9,  when  a  person  was  guilty  of 


ed  his  neighbour ; 
3  Or  e  jiave  found  that  which  was 
lost,  and  lielh  concerning  it,  and 
fsweareth  falsely;    in  any  of  all 

d  Prov.  24.  28,  and  26.  19.  ^  Deut.  22. 
I,  -2,  3.  ■  Exod.  u:2.  li.  ch.  19, 12.  Jer.  7.  9. 
Zecli.  5.  4. 


their  trust,  as  to  propertj'  deposited 
with  them,  is  so  very  common  a  cir- 
vumsiance,  that  a  large  proportion  of 
the  tales  with  which  the  Orienlal  stor}'- 
tL-llers  amuse  or  move  their  auditors,  in 
coffee-houses  and  elsewhere,  as  well  as 
of  those  which  are  written  in  books, 
turn  upon  the  contrivances  to  which  the 
owner  of  property  is  obliged  to  resort  in 
order  to  recover  it  from  the  person  to 
vx'hoin  it  has  been  intrusted.  Men  who 
would  have  remained  honest  under  the 
ordiuiiry  circumstances  of  life  are  loo 
often  drawn  aside  Irom  rectitude  by  the 
temptations  of  valuable  properly  com- 
mitted to  tlieir  trust.  Continual  expe- 
rience of  this  sort  has  had  a  very  un- 
happy effect  upon  the  moral  feelings  of 
Orientals.  Men  fear  to  confide  in  each 
otlier :  and,  in  the  case  of  property 
winch  persons  desire  to  secure,  tliey 
ol'ten  prefer  the  hazards  attending  the 
other  alternative  of  concealing  it  under 
ground,  or  in  strange  places,  or  even  to 
build  it  uj)  in  the  thick  walls  of  their 
houses.' — Pict.  Bib. IT  Or  in  fellow- 
ship. Heb.  1"^  r^ST^r;!!  bithsometh  yad, 
in  the  putting  of  the  hand.  The  original 
phrase  occurring  only  here,  seems  to 
denote  such  a  stipulation  as  takes  place 
in  copartnerships,  w^here  the  hand  of 
one  party  is  given  to  the  other  in  pledge 
of  upright  and  honorable  dealing.  The 
-term  is  applicable  however  to  any  mat- 
ter of  dealing  or  trafiic  accompanied  by 
a  joining  of  hands.  Gr.  -epi  Koivuviai, 
concerning  society  or  fellowship.  Chal. 
*  Fellowship  of  the  hand.'  Some  would 
render  it  a  thing  put  or  given  into  the 
hand,  a  deposit ;  but  this  is  expressed 
by  the  preceding  word  il"D5  pikkadon, 


60 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


5  Or  all  that  about  which  he  hath  I 
sworn  falsely  ;  he  shall  even  gre-  \ 
store  it  in  the  principal,  and  shall  \ 
add  the  fifth  part  more  thereto,  I 
and  give  it  unto  him  to  whom  it  i 
appertaineth,  in  the  day  of  his  tres- 1 
pass-offering.  j 

6  And  he  shall  bring  his  trespass- 
offering   unto   the  Lord,  i^a   ram 
without  blemish  out  of  the  flock,  [ 
with  thy  estimation  for  a  trespass- 1 
offering,  unto  the  priest: 

s  ch.  5.  16.  Numb.  6.  7.  ii  Sam.  12.  6. 
Luke  19.  8.     ^  ch.  5.  15. 

any  of  the  ofiences  here  specified,  and 
withholding  confession  was  convicted 
of  the  sanne  by  witnesses  in  a  court  of 
law,  he  was  required  to  make  a  four- 
fold restitution,  as  we  have  shown  in 
the  Note  on  that  passage.  Here  the 
mulct  is  lessened  in  consideration  of  a 
voluntary  acknowledgment.  He  was 
to  restore  the  principal  with  an  addi- 
tional fifth  part  as  a  compensation  to 
the  owner  lor  the  wrong  sustained  bj' 
him. 

5.  In  the  day  of  his  trespass-offering. 
That  is,  in  the  day  wherein  he  is 
found  a  trespasser,  rendered  by  the  Gr. 
TT}  iiiiEoa  ^yyiyx^lh  i^  ^^^  ^'^V  li-'herein  he 
is  convicted  or  reprehended  ;  or  it  may 
be  understood  as  in  our  present  version, 
the  day  wherein  his  trespass-offering 
was  presented.  The  requisite  restitu- 
tion was  not  to  be  delayed. 

The  Law  of  the  Burnt-offering. 
9.  This  is  the  laxo  of  the  burnt-offer- 
ing. That  is,  this  is  the  daily  burnt- 
offering  or  perpetual  sacrifice,  consisting 
of  two  lambs  offered  upon  the  altar  of 
burnt-ofiering,  one  in  the  morning  and 
the  other  in  the  evening.  That  of  the 
morning  was  offered  about  sunrise,  after 
the  incense  was  burnt  upon  the  golden 
altar,  and  before  any  oiher  s<)tTifice. 
That  of  the  evening  was  cflTered  in  the 
decUne  of  day,  before  the  night  began 
They  were  both  wholly  consumed  on 
the  altar,  after  the  same  manner  as  the 


7  iAnd  the  priest  shall  make  an 
atonement  for  him  before  the  Lord: 
and  it  shall  be  forgiven  him  for  any 
thing  of  all  that  he  hath  done  in 
trespassing  therein. 

8  H  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
PJoses,  saying, 

9  Command  Aaron  and  his  sons, 
sayhng,  Thisz.s  the  law  of  the  burnt- 
offering:  it  is  the  burnt-offering, 
because  of  the  burning  upon  the 
altar  all  night  unto  the  morning, 

i  ch.  4.  25^ 

free-will  burnt-offering,  but  by  a  slow 
fire,  that  they  might  continue  the  longer 
burning.  With  each  of  the  victims  was 
offered  a  bread-offering  and  a  drink-of 
fering  of  strong  wine  (see  Num.  28. 
5-7.),  the  latter  being  poured  out  before 
the  Lord,  or  about  the  altar,  as  a  liba- 
tion. The  Jewish  writers  consider  that 
the  morning  sacrifice  made  atonement 
for  the  sins  of  the  preceding  night,  and 
that  of  the  evening  for  the  sins  of  the 
preceding  day.  It  may  be  regarded  as 
a  daily  expression  of  national  as  well 
as  individual  repentance,  prayer,  and 
thanksgiving. — Moses  having  hitherto 
given  instructions  directed  more  espe- 
cially to  the  people,  and  pointing  out 
their  duties  in  respect  to  their  sacred 
oblations,  now  enters  upon  those  which 
had  particular  reference  to  the  priests, 
who  were  charged  with  the  oversight 
of  all  the  sacrifices  and  services  of 
their  religion IT  Because  of  the  burn- 
ing ;  or  as  it  may  be  rendered, '  It  is  that 
which  ascendeth  by  burning.'  It  seems 
to  be  designed  to  give  a  reason  of  the 
name,  which  is  in  Heb.  n^iy  olah,  as- 
cension, from  its  all  being  burnt  and 
ascending  in  smoke  and  flame.  The 
words  at  the  same  time  explain  trhat 
burnt-oflTering  he  means,  viz.  the  daily 
sacrifice,  wliich  was  tlie  })rinLipal  of 
this  kind  of  offerings,  and  regulated  all 

the  rest. IT  The  fire  of  the  attar  shall 

be  burning  in  (on)  it.  Heb.  Ipin 
tukad,  shall  be  made  to  burn  ;  as  the 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  VI. 


61 


and   the  fire  of  the  altar  shall  be 
burning  in  it. 

10  i«  And  the  priest  shall  put  on 
his  linen  garment,  and  his  linen 
breeches  shall  he  put  upon  his 
flesh,  and  take  up  the  ashes  which 
the  tire  hath  consumed  with  the 
burnt-offering  on  the  altar,  and  he 
shall  put  them  '  beside  the  altar. 

11  And  ni  he  shall  put  off  his  gar- 
ments, and  put  on  other  garments, 

i^  ch.  16.  4.  ExoA  28.  39,  40,  41,  43. 
Ezek.  44.  17,  18.     i  ch.  1.  16.     "'  Ezek.  44.  19. 

result  of  special  care  ;  shall  be  continu- 
ally nouriished. 

10.  Shall  put  on  his  linen  garment. 
Heb,  ^a  TT>D  middo  bad,  Gr.  x"''^»'« 
Xivovvj  his  linen  coat.  The  original 
word  1173  middo  is  a  derivative  from 
Tn?2  mtidad,  to  measure,  and  implies  a 
garment  commensurate  to  the  body,  and 
therefore  one  of  considerable  size.  '  It 
is  the  coat,' says  Sol.  Jarchi, '  and  the 
vcripture  calleth  it  Middo,  because  it 
was  like  his  measure  (Middalho)  that 
wore  it.'  The  Heb.  word  for  '  linen' 
{''\2had)  signifies  a  finer  kind  of  linen 
than  that  made  of  the  common  flax,  for 
which  another  term  is  employed,  and 
therefore  the  Chal.  here  renders  it  by 
'  garments  of  Bysse,'  of  which  see  Note 

on  Ex.  25.  4. IT  Shall  put  on  other 

garments.  That  is,  either  their  com- 
mon garments,  or,  as  some  of  the  Jew- 
ish commentators  understand,  other 
holy  garments.  The  garments  which 
the  priests  wore  in  the  sanctuary  they 
were  not  allowed  to  wear  elsewhere, 
Kzek  44.  17,  19,  '  And  it  shall  come  to 
pass  that  when  they  shall  enter  in  at 
the  gates  of  the  inner  court,  they  shall 
be  clothed  with  linen  garments.  And 
when  they  go  forth  into  the  outer  court, 
even  into  the  outer  court  of  the  people, 
ihev  shall  putoffliieir  garments  where- 
in they  ministered,  and  lay  them  in  the 
holy  ciiamhers,  and  they  shall  put  on 
other  garments  ;  and  they  shall  not 
sanctify  the  people  with  their  garments.' 
6 


and  carry  forth  the  ashes  without 
the  camp  n  unto  a  clean  pl&ce. 

12  And  the  fire  upon  the  altar 
shall  be  burning  in  it;  it  shall  not 
be  put  out :  and  the  priest  shall 
burn  v/ood  on  it  every  morning, 
and  lay  the  burnt-offering  in  order 
upon  it;  and  he  shall  burn  thereon 
othe  fat  of  the  peace-offerings. 

L3  The  fire  shall  ever  be  burning 
upon  the  altar;  it  shall  never  go 
out. 

"  ch.  4.  12.     0  ch.  3.  3,  9,  14. 


IT  Without  the  camp  unto  a  clean 

place.  This  indicated  that  some  de- 
gree of  holiness  attached  to  the  ashes 
as  the  relics  of  a  sacrifice  which  had 
its  accomplishment  in  the  sufferings 
and  death  of  Christ. 

12.  The  Jire  upon  the  altar  shall  be 
burning.  Heb.  Ipir,  tukad,  shall  be 
kindled  or  made  to  burn.  Although 
the  fire  that  consumed  the  sacrifices 
originally  came  down  from  heaven,  yet 
it  was  to  be  kept  perpetually  burning 
by  a  supply  of  fuel.  This  fuel  was  to 
be  exclusively  of  wood,  a  store  of  which 
was  provided  at  the  expense  of  the 
whole  congregation  ;  and  as  every  thing 
pertaining  to  the  service  of  God  was  to 
be  of  the  best,  so  the  wood  according  to 
the  Hebrews,  was  to  be  of  the  choicest 
quality  ;  that  which  was  worm-eaten 
being  instantly  rejected,  as  also  that 
which  was  obtained  from  the  timber  of 
old  demolished  buildings,  none  being 
admitted  but  that  which  was  perfectly 
sound.  In  imitation  of  this  perpetual 
fire,  the  ancient  Persian  Magi,  and  their 
descendants  the  Parsees,  kept  also  a 
fire  constantly  burning  ;  the  latter  con- 
tinue it  to  the  present  day.  Traces  of 
the  same  custom  are  to  be  found  among 
almost  all  heathen  nations.  Indee  1  it 
can  scarcely  be  doubled  that  the  Greek 
'  Estia  '  and  tlie  Roman  '  Vesta,'  goddess 
of  fire,  owed  their  origin  to  a  Hebrew 
source,  in  which  language  !L'J<  esh, 
Chal.  esha,  signifies  jire. 


62 


LEVITICUS. 


[E.  C.  1490. 


14  H  pAnd  this  is  the  law  of  the  i 
meat-offering.  'J'he  sons  of  Aaron  , 
shall  offer  it  before  the  Lokd,  be-  | 
fore  the  altar.  i 

15  And  he  shall  take  of  it  his  j 
handful,  of  the  flour  of  tlie  meat-  j 
ofl'ering,  and  of  the  oil  thereof,  | 
and  all  the  frankincense  which  is  I 
upon  the  meat-offering,  and  shall  ' 
burn  tt  upon  the  altar  fora  sweet  i 
savour,  even  the  q  memorial  of  it, ' 
unto  the  Lorii. 

16  And  rihe  remainder  thereof 
shall  Aaron  and  his  sons  eat  ; 
s  with  unleavened  bread  shall  it  be 
eaten  in  the  holy  place ;  in  the 
court  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation they  shall  eat  it. 

P  ch.  2.  1.  Numb.  15.  4.  <i  ch.  2  2,9. 
r  ch.  2.  3  Ezek.  44.  29.  s  yer.  26.  ch.  10. 
12,  13.     Numb.  IS.  10- 


The  Laii^  of  the  Meat-offering. 
14.  This  is  the  law  of  the  meat-offer- 
ing. Heb.  nnD?2  viin'hah,  of  wliicli 
see  Note  on  Lev.  2.  1-3.  This  precept 
respects  not  the  medt-offerins:  which 
was  to  accompany  the  daily  burnt-or- 
fering,  but  thai  which  was  offered  alone  ' 
as  a  Iree- will-offering,  and  in  place  of  a  i 
voluntary  burnt-offering  of  greater  va- 
lue, as  described  Lev.  2.  1-3.  The  sum 
of  the  directions  here  given  is,  that  no 
leaven  should  ever  be  mixed  with  such 
bread  or  cakes  ;  lliat  after  a  small  part 
of  it  had  been  burnt  upon  the  allar  as 
God's  portion,  the  priests  in  waiting 
were  to  have  the  remainder,  and  that 
this  was  to  be  eaten  in  the  court  of  the 
tabernacle  and  nowhere  else  —  in  all 
wliich  particulars  the  precept  corres- 
ponds to  that  given  relative  to  the  parts 
of  the  sin  and   trespass-offerings  that 

accrued  to  the  prie.sts. IT  The  sons 

of  Aaron  shall  offer  it.  That  is,  in 
rotation,  one  at  a  lime.  The  ])hrase 
'  sons  of  Aaron'  may  here  be  taken  in 
its  literal  sense,  but  in  after-lime  this 
expression  meant  the  successors  of 
Aaron  in  the  holy  office,  Comp.  v.  20. 


17  tit  shall  not  be  baken  with 
leaven.  "  I  have  given  it  unto 
them  for  their  portion  of  my  offer- 
ings made  by  fire.  ^Jt  is  most 
holy,  as  is  the  sin-offering,  and  as 
the  trespass-offering. 

18  y  All  the  males  among  the 
ciiildren  of  Aaron  shall  eat  of  it. 
7-11  shall  be  a.  statute  for  ever  ia 
your  generations  concerning  the 
offerings  of  the  Lord  made  by  fire : 
a  every  one  that  toucheih  them 
shall  be  holy. 

19  ^  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

20  b  This  IS  the  offering  of  Aaron 
and  of  his  sons,  which  they  shall 

t  ch.  2.  11.  -^  Numb.  13.  9,  19.  ^  ver.  25. 
ch.  2.  3.  and  7.  1.  Exod.  29.  37-  r  ver.  29. 
Numb.  IS.  10.  ^  ch.  3.  17.  ^  ch.  22,  3,4,  5, 
G,  7.     Exod.  29.  37.     "  Exod.  29.  2. 

16.  With  unleavened  bread  shall  it 
be  eaten.  Tlie  insertion  of  the  word 
'with'  in  this  place,  wliich  does  not 
occur  in  the  original,  obscures  the  true 
sense.  The  meaning  is,  not  that  the 
remainder  of  the  nieat-offering  was  to 
be  eaten  by  the  priests  with  the  addi- 
tion of  unleavened  calces,  but  that  the 
meal  itself  was  to  be  7nade  into  unlea- 
vened  cakeSy  and   thus  eaten. IT  In 

the  holy  place.  This  phrase  denotes  in 
this  connexion,  contrary  to  its  ordinary 
import,  tlie  court  of  the  tabernacle 
where  all  the  holy  things  were  boiled, 
baked,  dressed  and  eaten  by  the  Levit- 
ical  order,  w-ho  ministered  at  the  altar. 

IS.  Every  one  that  toucheth  them. 
Or  Heb.  5?^''  TITJ*  ^3  kol  asher  yigga, 
all  that  toucheth;  impljing  things  as 
well  as  persons.  The  meaning  is,  that 
no  unclean  person  or  common  vessel 
of  ministry  might  touch  them.  Gr. 
TTas  bi  cav  axprjrat  avrojv  iytaidrjcnraif 
whosoever  toucheth  them  shall  be  sanc- 
tified. '  The  meaning  is,'  says  Chaz- 
kuni, '  that  he  shall  purify  liimself  be- 
fore he  touch  them  j  and  that  any  vessel 
or  implement  to  be  used  about  them 
shall  first  be  sanctified.'     Junius,  how- 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  VI. 


63 


offer  unto  the  Lord  m  the  day 
wlien  he  is  anointed  ;  the  tenth 
part  of  an  cephah  of  fine  flour  for 
a  meat-offering  perpetual,  lialf  of 
it  in  the  morning,  and  half  thereof 
at  night. 

21  In  a  pan  it  shall  be  made  with 
oil ;  and  xchen  it  is  baken,  thou 
shalt  bring  it  in  ;  and  the  baken 
pieces  of  the  meat-offering  shalt 
thou  offer /or  a  sweet  savour  unto 
the  Lord. 

22  And    the    priest  of    his  sons 

c  Exod.  Ifi.  36. 

ever,  contends  that  the  '  toucliingJ 
refers  wholly  to  persons,  and  not  to 
things,  because  it  comes  in  as  a  reason 
for  the  eating  of  thein  being  confined  to 
Aaron's  sons;  while  Hesychius  ascribes 
the  sanclificatiou  to  the  touch.  Comp. 
V.  27. 

The  Offering  at  the  Consecration  of  a 
Priest. 
20.  In  the  day  when  he  is  anointed. 
From  the  obvious  import  of  the  pre- 
cept,  we  should  naturally  understand 
that  this  offering,  called  by  the  Jews 
*  the  meal-offering  of  initiation  or  con- 
secration,' was  to  be  presented  only  on 
the  day  in  which  any  one  of  the  high 
priests'  line  was  inducted  into  office  ; 
but  it  is  maintained  by  several  of  the 
Hebrew  commentators  that  the  high 
priest  was  bound  to  offer  it  daily,  be- 
ginning from  the  day  in  which  he  was 
anointed,  and  continuing  it  llirough  the 
whole  period  of  his  office  ;  so  that, 
according  to  them,  'in  the  day'  is 
equivalent  to  'from  the  day.'  Joseplius 
also  says,  '  The  high  priest  sacrificed 
twice  every  day  at  liis  own  charges,  and 
that  this  was  his  sacrifice.'  It  is,  how- 
ever,  doubtful  whether  such  a  construc- 
tion can  fairly  be  put  upon  the  passage. 
It  may  be  called  '  a  meal-offering  per- 
petual,' from  its  being  always  statedly 
ofit-red  at  the  Higii  Priests'  initiation 
into  office.  From  this  we  may  under- 
stand what  is  intended  by  its  being  said 


^  that  is  anointed  in  his  stead  shall 
offer  it :  It  is  a  statute  fur  ever 
unto  the  Lord;  e  it  shall  be  wholly 
burnt. 

23  For  every  meat-offering  for 
the  priest  shall  be  wholly  burnt : 
it  shall  not  be  eaten. 

24  If  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

25  Speaiv  unto  Aaron  and  to  his 
sons,  saying,  fThiszs  the  law  of 
the   sin-offering:    gin    the    place 

<i  ch.  4.  3.  e  Exod.  29.  25.  f  ch.  4.  2. 
s  ch.  1.  3,  5,  11,  and  4.  24,  29,  33. 

that  this  is  '  the  offering  of  Aaron  and 
his  sons,  and  that  they  should  offer  it,' 
&c.  It  is  not  that  lie  and  they  should 
offer  it  together,  but  Aaron  now,  and 
his  sons  successively  in  after  times,  as 
they  were  inducted  in  turn  into  the 
priestly  dignity. 

23.  It  shall  not  be  eaten.  In  this  res* 
pect  it  differed  from  the  other  meaU 
offering.  The  Priest's  offering  must  be 
all  burnt,  because,  altliough  he  figura- 
tively bore  the  sins  of  the  people,  yet 
there  was  no  one  to  bear  his  sins,  nor 
could  he  bear  them  himself  There 
was,  moreover,  a  general  rule  (v.  30), 
against  the  eating  of  any  sacrifice,  the 
blood  of  which  was  brought  within  the 
tabernacle  ;  and  such  were  the  offerings 
of  the  Priest  and  the  Congregation. 
See  Note  on  v.  30. 

The  Law  of  the  Sin-offering. 
25.  This  is  the  law  of  the  sin-offer- 
ing. The  directions  here  given  are 
mainly  a  repetition  of  those  contained 
Lev.  4.  24-31,  but  with  these  additional 
circumstances,  viz.  that  none  but  con- 
secrated persons  or  things  should  touch 
any  part  of  it  after  it  was  once  devoted 
to  God,  but  especially  the  blood  that  was 
spilled  for  the  atonement  of  the  offerer. 
And  with  a  view  to  preserve  the  strict- 
est  regard  to  holy  things,  if  any  of  its 
blood  at  the  time  of  the  slaughter  should 
chance  to  dash  upon  the  robes  even  of 
the  priest  in  waiting,  it  was  to  be  wash- 


64 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


where  the  burnt-ofrerin;^  is  killed 
shall  the  sin-ofTering  be  killed  be- 
fore the  Lord  :  ^  it  is  most  holy. 

26  iThe  priest  that  offereth  it 
for  sin  shall  eat  it :  k  in  the  holy 
place  shall  it  be  eaten,  in  the  court 
of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congrega- 
tion. 

27  1  Whatsoever  shall  touch  the 


h  ver.  17.  ch.  21.  22.  '  ch.  10.  17,  18. 
Numb.  IS.  9,  10.  Ezek.  44.  23,  29.  ^  ver.  16. 
1  Exod.  29.  37,  and  30.  29. 


ed  out ;  but  particularly  if  it  fell  upon 
the  clothes  of  the  offerer,  it  was  to  be 
most  carefully  cleansed.  If  it  wore 
sprinkled  upon  any  earthen  vessel  into 
which  it  would  sink  deep,  and  not  be 
easily  rubbed  out,  such  vessel  was  to  be 
broken  and  laid  by  ;  and  if  upon  a  ves- 
sel of  brass,  which  from  its  hardness 
would  be  less  apt  to  imbibe  the  liquid, 
it  was  to  be  well  scoured  and  rinsed. 
All  this  went  to  shadow  forth  the  con- 
tagion of  sin,  and  the  constant  care  re- 
quisite to  cleanse  ourselves  by  repent- 
ance and  faith  from  its  polluting  stains. 
Of  this  truth  the  ancient  Hebrew  doc- 
tors seem  to  have  had  a  clear  percep- 
tion, as  R.  Menahem  says,  in  speaking 
of  tliis  washing  of  garments,  that  the 
reason  of  it  was,  '  that  it  was  necessary 
to  do  away  uncleanness  by  the  w^aters 

that  are    on  high.' IT  In  the  place 

u-here  the  burnt-offering  is  killed  shall 
the  sin-offering  be  killed.  That  was 
on  the  north  side  of  the  altar,  Lev.l.  11, 
'  Thereby  was  figured,'  says  Ainsworth, 
'  that  Christ,  our  Sin-offering,  should  be 
crucified  on  Mount  Cavalry,  which  was 
on  the  north-west  side  of  Jerusalem  ;  as 
by  the  Jews'  tradition  the  morning 
sacrifice  was  killed  at  the  north-west 
horn  of  the  altar.' 

26.  The  priest  that  offereth  it  for 
sin.  Heb.  ir.ii  S^ur^^H  "prn  hakkohi'n 
ham'hatieoiho.  the  priest  thai  expiateth- 
sin-by-it.  Chal.  '  That  makeih  atone- 
ment by  the  blood  thereof.'  Gr. 
avaipcpuv,  that  offereth.  The  phraseolo- 
gy  is  remarkable  from  the  fact  that  the 


flesh  thereof  shall  be  holy  :  and 
when  there  is  sprinkled  of  the 
blood  thereof  upon  any  garment, 
thou  shalt  wash  that  whereon  it 
was  sprinkled  in  the  holy  place. 
28  But  the  earthen  vessel  wherein 
it  is  sodden  m  shall  be  broken  :  and 
if  it  be  sodden  in  a  brazen  pot,  it 
shall  be  both  scoured,  and  rinsed 


in  water. 


m  ch.  11.  33,  and  15.  12. 


original  word  comes  from  the  same  root 
as  nx^tsn  'hattlah,  sin  or  siti-offering. 
In  the  Piel  form,  which  here  occurs,  it 
is  defined  by  Gesenius,  fo  offer  as  a  sin- 
offering,  to  make  atonement,  to  expiate, 
to  cleanse  persons  or  things  by  a  sacred 
rite. 

21.  Whatsoever  shall  touch  the  blood 
thereof,  fyc.  That  is,  the  blood  of  the 
sin-offering,  whether  it  were  that  which 
was  to  be  eaten,  or  that  which  was  to 
be  burnt — a  rile  peculiar  to  the  sin- 
offering  above  all  the  other  most  holy 
things.  As  this  sacrifice  has  especial 
respect  to  Christ,  who  was  made  sin  for 
us,  so  this  direction  may  perhaps  point 
to  the  reverential  and  holy  use  that  is 
to  be  made  of  the  mystery  of  our  re- 
demption,  of  which  those  that  are  made 
partakers  ought  to  be  washed,  cleansed, 
and  sanctified  ;  to  possess  the  vessels 
of  their  bodies  in  holiness  and  honor; 
and  not  to  yield  their  members  as  in- 
struments of  unrighteousness  unto  in- 
iquity. 

2S.  The  earthen  vessel  wherein  it  was 
sodden  shall  be  broken.  '  This  is  a  very 
remarkable  instruction.  We  all  know 
that  earthen  vessels  are  broken,  and 
others  thoroughly  scoured,  when  sup 
posed  to  be  defiled,  among  the  Moham- 
medans and  Hindoos,  as  they  were  also 
among  the  Jews.  But  the  present  in- 
stance is  of  a  different  character.  Tlie 
earthen  vessel  was  to  be  broken,  and 
the  copper  one  scoured  and  rinsed,  not 
because  they  were  defiled,  but  because 
the  flesh  of  the  sin-oflfering  having  been 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  VI. 


65 


29  nAU  the  males  among  the 
priests  shall  eat  thereof:  oit  is 
most  holy. 

30  p  And  no  sin-offering,  whereof 

"  ver.  18.  Numb.  IS-  10,  °  ver.  25.  P  ch. 
4.  7,  11,  1-2,  18,  21,  and  10.  18.  and  16.  27. 
Heb.  13.  11. 


cooked  in  ihem,  ihey  had  thus  become 
too  sacred  for  common  use.  We  shall 
elsewhere  have  occasion  to  remark  on 
instances  in  which  earthen  utensils 
were  broken,  and  others  scoured  in  con- 
sequence of  defilement.  At  present  we 
only  direct  attention  to  the  fact,  that  at 
this  time  the  culinary  vessels  of  the 
Hebrews  seem  to  have  been  exclusively 
of  earthenware  or  copper.  Iron,  though 
known  to  them,  was  at  this  time  very 
little  in  use  for  any  purpose,  and  even 
when  they  became  better  acquainted 
with  that  valuable  metal  it  is  doubtful 
if  their  culinary  or  other  vessels  were 
ever  made  of  it.  At  least,  no  pot,  pan, 
or  other  vessel  is  said  in  all  the  Scrip- 
lure  to  be  of  iron.  What  is  translated 
'  iron  pan,'  in  Ezek.  4.  3,  is  properly  an 
'  iron  plate,'  as  the  context  alone  suffi- 
ciently indicates.  In  point  of  fact,  the 
culinary  and  other  domestic  vessels 
througliout  the  East  remain  to  this  day, 
as  we  find  them  thus  early  in  the  Mo- 
saic history,  either  of  copper,  earthen- 
ware, or  wood  (ch.  11.  38;  14.  12), 
although  no  doubt  the  quality  and  man- 
ufacture have  much  improved.  The 
writer,  in  the  course  of  journeys  and 
residence  in  different  parts  of  Western 
Asia,  does  not  think  that  he  ever  met 
with  an  instance  of  a  cooking  vessel  of 
any  other  metal  than  copper :  and  dishes 
and  bowls  of  the  same  metal  tinned  are 
those  which  most  usually  make  their 
appearance  on  the  tables  of  kings  and 
great  men.  When  luxury  desires  some- 
thing more  rich  and  costly  for  the  table 
thiui  copper,  it  finds  indulgence,  not  in 
silver  and  gold,  but  in  china  and  fine 
earthenware.' — Pict.  Bib. 

30.  And  no  sin-offering  whereof,  SfC. 
We  see  from  Lev.  4.  5,  16,  that  the 
6* 


any  of  the  blood  is  brought  into  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation  to 
reconcile  withal  in  the  holy  place^ 
shall  be  eaten :  it  shall  be  burnt  in 
the  fire. 


blood  of  the  sin-ofierings  for  the  high 
priest  and  the  congregation  was  brought 
into  the  tabernacle,  and  consequently 
they  were  not  to  be  eaten,  but  to  be 
burnt,  as  we  learn  was  the  fact.  Lev.  4. 

12,  2L  As  it  appears  from  Lev.  10.  17. 
that  the  eating  of  the  offerings  of  the 
people  was  in  a  sense  typical  of  the 
bearing  and  expiating  their  sins,  this 
precept  tended  to  show  the  intrinsic 
inability  of  the  Levitical  priesthood  to 
procure  a  complete  reconciliation  of 
men  to  God.  This  will  be  more  evident 
from  viewing  the  passage  in  its  evan 
gelical  connexions.     The  apostle,  Heb 

13.  10-13,  says,  'We  have  an  altar, 
whereof  they  have  no  right  to  eat  which 
serve  the  tabernacle.  For  the  bodies 
of  those  beasts,  whose  blood  is  brought 
into  the  sanctuary  by  the  high  priest 
for  sin,  are  burned  without  the  camp. 
Wherefore  Jesus  also,  that  he  might 
sanctify  the  people  with  his  own  blood, 
suffered  without  the  gate.  Let  us  go 
forth  therefore  unto  him  without  the 
camp,  bearing  his  reproach.'  Now  it 
is  to  be  recollected,  that  under  the  law 
the  blood  of  such  sacrifices  as  were 
eaten  by  the  priests  came  not  into  the 
sanctuary  j  which  argued  the  unworthi- 
ness  and  incompetency  of  those  sacri- 
fices to  answer  the  end  of  a  perfect 
atonement.  But  Christ,  with  his  blood 
shed  for  our  sins,  entered  into  the  holy 
place,  not  that  which  was  made  with 
hands,  but  into  heaven  itself,  and  there- 
by obtained  eternal  redemption  for  us, 
Heb.  9.  11,  12,  24.  This  great  sacrifice 
therefore  does  away  the  availableness 
of  the  Levitical  offerings.  As  the 
priests  of  the  law  were  forbidden  to  eat 
of  the  propitiatory  sacrifices  whose 
blood  was  carried  within  the  vail,  but 


66 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


were  commanded  to  burn  them  entirely 
without  the  camp,  what  right  can  they 
have,  while  they  adhere  to  the  legal 
institution,  to  partake  of  Christ's  sacri- 
fice ?  If  lliey  continue  to  adhere  to  the 
legal  services  of  the  tabernacle,  they 
virtually  renounce  the  benefit  of  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ.  Indeed,  the  apostle  } 
would  intimate,  that  the  Levitical 
priesthood  is  necessarily  abolished,  for 
there  is  now  nothing  on  which  the 
priests  can  live,  if  not  upon  that  altar 
on  which  they  are  to  feed  by  faith. 
Tliis  he  proves  thus  :  The  bodies  of 
those  beasts  whose  blood  was  brought 
into  the  sanctuary  by  the  high  priest, 
were  burnt  without  the  camp.  Conse- 
quently there  was  nolliing  left  of  them 
for  their  sustenance.  But  these  sacri- 
fices were  a  most  significant  type  o(  the 
sacrifice  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ, 
who  has  become  the  substance  of  the 
legal  shadovs's.  "What  then  shall  the 
priests  eat?  Upon  what  shall  they 
live,  if  not  by  fdilh  upon  tlie  great  pro- 


pit 


?      What  other  altar  but  the 


Ciirislian  altar  remains?  And  what 
right  can  they  have  to  this,  if  they  ad- 
here  to  the  Jewish  ? 

Resiarks  — (2.)  No  sentiment  should 
be  more  deeply  engraven  upon  our 
hearts  than  that  a  sin  against  our 
neighbor  is  a  trespass  against  God.  So 
David  says,  '  Against  ihee,  thee  only 
have  I  sinned,  and  done  this  evil  in  thy 
sight,'  though  his  offence  was  primarily 
committed  against  Uriah. 

(3.)  '  Or  have  found  that  which  was 
lost.'  The  judgment  of  every  honest 
mind  is,  that  he  who  finds  any  lost  pro- 
perty, and  makes  not  all  due  inquiry  to 
ascertain  the  owner,  should  in  equity 
be  treated  as  a  thief. 

(5,  6.)  '  Shall  bring  his  trespass- 
off"ering  unto  the  Lord,  a  ram  without 
blemish.'  By  this  precept  we  are  again 
taught  that  disobedience  to  God  is  tlie 
groat  evil  even  of  those  crimes  which 
are  injurious  to  man,  and  that  repent- 
ance, an<l  even  restitution,  though  need- 


ful, in  order  to  forgiveness,  cannot  atone 
for  sin. 

(12.)  As  the  priest  was  to  renew  the 
fire  upon  the  altar  every  morning,  and 
to  guard  with  the  utmost  care  against 
its  going  out,  so  our  first  work  with  the 
return  of  the  morning  light,  should  be 
that  the  fire  of  holy  love  be  kindled 
afresh  in  our  hearts,  and  through  the 
day  our  study  should  be  to  keep  it  con- 
stantly burning. 

(22.)  '  And  the  priest  shsU  ofiTer  it.' 
Tlie  benefits  of  Christ's  atonement,  in 
order  to  be  available,  must  be  personally 
apprehended.  However  intrinsically' 
sulficicnt  for  the  sanation  of  all  men, 
none  will  be  tlie  belter  for  it  who  do 
not  for  themselves  make  use  of  it.  The 
off'ending  priest,  or  ruler,  or  common 
person,  must  /im.se// bring  his  sin-offer- 
ing, must  lay  his  ou-ti  hands  upon  its 
head,  must  thus  show  liow  nearly  ho 
fell  himself  lo  be  concerned  in  the  cere- 
mony ;  and  every  sinner  now  Uiust  in- 
dividually bring  this  sacrifice  ol  Clirist, 
in  failli,  as  the  atonement  for  his  own 
sin.  He  must  not  rest  in  the  mere 
generality  that  '  we  are  all  sinners,' 
and  '  Christ  died  for  all.'  He  must  feel 
and  apply  all  this  to  himself.  He  must 
in  eflecl  say,  '  Lord,  I  am  indeed  a  sin- 
ner ;  a  great  and  grievous  sinner  against 
thee  ;  but  here  is  my  sin-offering  ;  here 
is  the  sacrifice  of  ihine  own  blessed 
Son  ;  here  is  the  atonement  of  thine  ap- 
pointinent ;  this  1  bring  to  thee  with  my 
soul's  approval,  and  my  heart's  desire 
that  it  may  be  accepted  by  thee,  and 
put  away  ail  my  sin.' 


CHAPTER   VII. 

Additional  Rules  and  Distinctions  rela- 
tive to  the  Trespass-offerings. 

1 .  This  is  the  law  of  the  trespass-offer- 
ing. In  the  Heb.  simjily  ti'dH^Ti  mC 
torath  hddsham,  the  law  of  the  trespass 
Gr.  h  voftos  Tov  KOtov  ruv  ttsoi  r^TiiiiicXiia^- 
the  law  of  the  ram  for  trespass.  It  is  a 
law  for  the  direction  of  the  jiriests  in 
the  discharge  of  their  office  relative  to 


B.  a  1490.] 


CHAPTER  VII. 


6T 


CHAPTER  VII. 

LIKEWISE  a  this  IS  the  law  of 
ihe   trespass-offering:    bit  is 
must  holy. 

2  cin  the  place  where  they  kill 
the  burnt-offering  shall  they  kill 
the  trespass-offering:  and  the  blood 
thereof  shall  he  sprinkle  round 
about  upon  the  altar. 

3  And  he  shall  offer  of  it  dall  the 
fat  thereof;  the  rump,  and  the  fat 
that  covereih  the  inwards, 

4  And  the  two  kidneys,  and  the 
fat  that  ts  on  them,  which  is  by 
the  flanks,  and    the  caul   that  ts 


»  ch.  5.  and  6.  1—7-  b  ch.  6.  17,  25,  and 
21.  -^-2.  cch.  1.3,  .5,  11,  and  4  24,29,33. 
d  ch.  3.  4,  0,  10,  14,  1.5,  16,  and  4.  8.  9.  Exod. 
29.  13. 


the  Trespass-offering. IT  It  is  monl 

holy.  Heb.  iiin  t'^^lp  I^ip  kode.sh 
kodoshim  hoo,  it  is  holiness  ofholinesses. 
Tlie  de-sign  is  to  convey  a  general  sig- 
nificant intimation  in  regard  to  the  na- 
ture of  these  offerings.  They,  as  well 
as  the  Sin-offerings,  were  to  be  ranked 
in  their  estimation  among  the  *  most 
holy  things,'  and  practically  treated 
accordingly.     Comp.  v.  6. 

2.  The  blood  thereof  shall  he  sprinkle 
round  about  upon  the  altar.  The  rites 
in  regard  to  the  Sin  and  the  Trespass- 
offering  were  for  the  most  part  the 
same,  but  there  was  tliis  difference  as  to 
tlie  disposal  of  the  blood,  viz.  that  the 
blood  of  the  Trespass-offering  here  men- 
tioned was  to  be  sprinkled  round  the 
altar,  whereas  that  of  the  Sin-offering 
was  to  be  put  upon  the  horns  of  the 
altar.  Ch.  4.  25,  34,  This  moreover 
was  to  be  a  male,  the  other  m^ight  be  a 
female  sacrifice.  This  was  always  for 
a  single  person,  but  a  Sin-offering  might 
be  for  the  whole  congregation.  Lev. 
4.  13. 

4.  The  fat  that  is  on  them.  That  is, 
chiefly  the  fat  that  was  found  in  a  de- 
tached state,  not  mixed  with  the  muscles. 

6.  Every  male  among  the  priests  shall 


above  the  liver,  with  the  kidneys, 
it  shall  he  take  away: 

5  And  the  priest  shall  bum  them 
upon  the  altar/yran  offering  made 
by  fire  unto  the  Lord:  it  is  a  tres- 
pass-offering. 

ti  e  Every  male  among  the  priests 
shall  eat  thereof:  it  shall  be  eaten 
in  the  holy  place  :  fit  is  most  holy. 

7  As  the  sin-offering  is,  so  is  g  the 
trespass-offering  :  there  is  one  law 
for  them:  the  priest  that  makelh 
atonement  therewith  shall  have  it. 

8  And  the  priest  that  offereth 
any  man's  burnt-offering,  even  the 
priest  shall  have  to  himself  the 
skin  of  the  burnt-offering  which  he 
hath  offered. 

«  ch.  6.  16,  17,  IS.  Numb.  IS.  9.  10  f  ch. 
2.  3.     e  ch.  6.  25,  26,  and  14.  13. 


eat  thereof.  All  the  fat  being  offered  to 
God,  the  flesh  became  theporiion  of  the 
priest,  who,  witli  his  male  children,  was 
to  eat  it,  but  only  within  the  precincts 
of  the  sanctuary. 

7.  There  is  one  law  for  them.  The 
import  is,  that  what  has  been  omitted 
in  the  explanation  of  the  Sm-offering 
must  be  learned  from  that  of  the  Tres- 

pass-offering,  and  vice  versa. IT  Shall 

have  it.  That  is,  by  synecdoclie,  that 
part  of  it  which  was  by  the  divine  con- 
stitution allowed  to  the  priest. 

8.  The  priest  shall  have  to  himself 
the  skin.  All  the  flesh  of  the  burnt- 
offerings  being  consumed  as  well  as  the 
fat,  there  could  nothing  fall  to  the  share 
of  the  priest  but  the  skin  ;  which  must 
have  been  very  valuable,  as  they  were 
used  as  mattresses,  and  probably  as  car- 
pets to  sit  upon  in  the  day,  as  they  are 
still  used  by  some  of  the  inhabitants 
and  the  dervishes  of  the  East.  See 
Harmer's  observations,  vol.  ].  p.  236. 
Bp.  Patrick  remarks  upon  this  passage, 
that '  It  is  probable  that  Adam  himself 
offered  the  first  sacrifice,  and  liad  the 
skin  given  him  by  God,  to  make  gar- 
ments for  him  and  liis  wife  ;  in  conform- 
ity to  which  the  priests  ever  after  had 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


9  And  ^  all  the  meal-offering  that 
is  baken  in  the  oven,  and  all  that 
is  dressed  in  the  frying-pan,  and  in 
the  pan,  shall  be  the  priest's  that 
offereth  it. 

10  And  every  meat-offering  min- 
gled with  oil,  and  dry,  shall  all  the 
sons  of  Aaron  have,  one  as  much 
as  another. 

11  And  ithis  is  the  law  of  the 

h  ch.  2.  3. 10.     Numb.  IS.  9.     Ezek.  44.29. 
i  ch.  3.  1,  and  22.  18.  21. 


the  skin  of  the  whole  burnt-offering  for 
their  portion  :  which  was  a  custom 
among  the  Gentiles  as  well  as  the  Jews, 
who  gnve  ih.e  skins  of  their  sacrifices  to 
the  priests  when  they  were  not  burnt 
with  the  sacrifices.' 

9,  10.  And  all  the  meat-offerings. 
That  is,  all  the  baked  or  fried  meat- 
offerings, with  the  exception  of  that 
part  called  the  '  memorial,'  ch.2,  4-10, 
and  which  was  to  be  burnt  upon  the 
altar,  was  to  go  to  the  particular  priest 
that  offered  it ;  but  in  the  case  of  the 
raiv  flour-offerings  of  that  kind,  the 
remainder  was  to  be  equally  shared  by 
all  the  priests  in  attendance. 

Additional  Rules  respecting  the  Peace- 
offerings. 
11.  And  this  is  the  law,  ^c.  Direc- 
tions had  previously  been  given,  ch.  3. 
to  the  people,  regulating  this  kind  of 
offerings  when  presented  by  them  ;  but 
in  this  connexion  more  specific  orders 
are  given  to  the  priests  on  the  same 
subject.  The  reason  of  this  was,  that 
as  there  were  several  sorts  of  peace- 
offerings,  so  there  were  various  rites  to 
be  observed  in  regard  to  thein — riles 
which  are  here  called  'the  law  of  the 
peace-offerings.'  In  the  order  in  which 
the  different  offerings  are  spoken  of  in 
ch.  3.  the  peace-offering  occurs  the 
third  ;  but  m  that  chapter  the  law  of 
peace-offerings  is  no  further  slated  than 
as  it  accords  with  the  burnt-offering, 
and  the  fuller  statement  is  reserved  for 
the  passage  before  us.    Hence,  in  the 


sacrifice  of  peace-offerings,  which 
he  shall  offer  unto  the  Lord. 

12  If  he  offer  it  for  a  thanksgiv- 
ing, then  he  shall  offer  with  the 
sacrifice  of  thanksgiving  unleaven- 
ened  cakes  mingled  with  oil,  and 
unleavened  wafers  k anointed  with 
oil,  and  cakes  mingled  with  oil,  of 
fine  flour,  dried. 

13  Besides  the  cakes,  he  shall 
offer  for  his  offering,    i  leavened 

k  ch.  2.  4.     Numb.  6.  1.5.     '  Amos  4.  5. 


enumeration  of  the  different  offcrmgs  in 
v.  37,  the  peace-offering  is   fiily-men- 

tioned  last. IT  Which  he  shall  offer. 

The  word  '  he '  here  has  no  express 
antecedent.  It  should  be  rendered  ac- 
cording to  the  frequent  idiom  of  the 
Hebrew,  '  which  one  shall  offer,'  or 
'  which  shall  be  offered.'  See  Note  on 
Lev.  1.5. 

1.  The  Eucharistic  Peace-offering. 

12,  IZ.  If  he  offer  it  for  a  thanks- 
giving. Heb.  min  ^y  al  todah,  for  a 
confession.  Gr.-mpi  an  tucwi.  for  praise. 
Thai  is,  in  token  of  gratitude  for  special 
mercies  and  favors  received,  such  as 
recovery  from  sickness,  preservation  in 
a  journey,  deliverance  at  sea.  redemp- 
tion from  captivity,  all  of  which  are 
specified  in  Psalm  107,  and  for  them 
men  are  called  upon  to  offer  the  sacri- 
fice of  thanksgiving.  In  allusion  to  this 
kind  of  offering  the  apostle  says,  Heb. 
13.  15,  <■  By  him,  therefore,  let  us  offer 
the  sacrifice  of  praise  to  God  continu- 
ally.' In  regard  to  oblations  of  this 
kind,  the  precept  is,  that  along  with 
the  bullock,  goat,  or  sheep,  the  offerer 
should  present  pancakes  mixed  with 
pure  oil,  but  unleavened,  inasmuch  as 
part  of  them  was  to  be  offered  up  to 
God  with  the  fat  upon  the  altar,  where 
leaven  was  entirely  prohibited.  Still 
leaven  was  not  excluded  from  another 
part  of  the  offering,  viz.  that  of  the 
bread  of  the  priests,  which  was  not 
burnt  upon  the  altar.  The  occasion  of 
the  offering,  it  is  to  be  recollected,  was 


B.  C.  1490.3 


CHAPTER  VII. 


bread,  wiih  the  sacrifice  of  thanks- 
giving of  his  peace-offerings. 

14  And  of  it  he  shall  offer  one 
out  of  the  whole  oblation  for  an 
heave-offering  unto  the  Lord, 
m  and  it  shall  be  the  priest's  that 
sprinkleth  the  blood  of  the  peace- 
offerings. 

■^'  Numb.  18.  8,  11,  10. 


one  of  gratitude,  praise,  and  rejoicing; 
and  on  such  an  occas-ion  God  would 
kindly  allow  a  more  palatable  species 
of  food  for  his  servants,  and  accept  at 
his  own  table  the  same  bread  which 
they  were  wont  to  use  at  theirs. 

14.  Of  it  he  shall  offer  one.  Heb. 
']:?2'-i  mimmenu,  of  it  ;  i.  e.  of  the 
bread,  one  of  the  leavened  cakes  or 
loaves  before-mentioned,  which  was  to 
be  j)resenled  to  God  as  a  heave-ofTering. 
When  this  was  done,  all  that  remained 
was  the  portion  of  the  priest  who 
sprinkled  the  blood  of  the  peace-offer- 
ings on  the  altar. IT  For  an  heave- 
offering.  Heb.  n?2"l"iri  terumah,  from 
ilie  root  tlT^  ram,  to  lift  up ;  so  called 
from  its  being  heaved  or  lifted  up  on 
high^  ill  token  that  it  was  thereby 
directed  to  the  God  of  heaven,  and 
devoutly  proffered  to  his  acceptance. 
Gr.  and  Chal.  'A  separation,  or  sepa- 
rated thing.'  For  a  full  account  of 
this  kind  of  offering  see  Note  on  Ex. 
29.  24,  28. 

}o.  Shall  be  eaten  the  same  day  that  it 
is  offered.  The  reason  of  this  injunc- 
tion, which  was  observed  in  most  of  the 
sacred  feasts,  especially  the  passover, 
may  be  learned  from  the  following  ap- 
propriate extract  from  Philo  : — '  It  was 
not  fit  that  those  holy  things  should  be 
put  into  their  cupboards,  but  immedi- 
ately set  before  those  who  were  in 
need  ;  for  they  were  no  longer  his  who 
offered  them,  but  his  to  whom  they 
were  offered ;  who  being  himself  most 
liberal  and  bountiful,  would  have  guests 
invited  to  his  table  to  partake  with  those 
who  offered  the  sacrifice.  And  these 
he  would  not  have  to  look  upon  them- 


15  nAnd  the  flesh  of  the  sacrifice 
of  his  peace-offerings  for  thanks- 
giving shall  be  eaten  the  same  day 
that  it  is  offered  ;  he  shall  not 
leave  any  of  it  until  the  morning. 

16  But  oif  the  sacrifice  of  his 
offering  be  a  vow,  or  a  voluntary 

»  ch.  22.  30.         o  ch.  19.  6,  7,  8. 

selves  as  masters  of  the  feast,  for  they 
are  but  ministers  of  the  feast,  not  mas- 
ters or  entertainers  ;  that  belongs  to 
God  himself,  whose  bounty  ought  not  to 
be  concealed  by  preferring  sordid  par- 
simony before  generous  humanity.' 
His  meaning  obviously  is,  that  all  the 
sacrifice  was  God's,  who  graciously 
granted  to  him  who  offered  it  a  part  of 
it  with  which  to  entertain  his  friends 
and  the  poor,  whom  he  would  have  to 
be  invited  forthwith,  that  no  part  of  it 
might  be  perverted  to  any  other  than 
the  designed  use.  Add  to  this,  that  in 
a  country  like  Palestine,  it  was  apt  to 
putrify  ;  and  as  it  was  considered  to 
be  holy,  it  would  be  very  improper  to 
expose  that  to  putrefaction  which  had 
been  consecrated  to  the  Divine  Being. 

2.  The  Votive,  or  Voluntary  Peace- 
offering. 
16.  If  the  sacrifice  of  his  offering  be 
a  vow.  This  was  the  second  kind  of 
peace-offerings  contemplated  in  this 
part  of  the  law.  They  were  such  as 
were  either  simply  and  unconditionally 
devoted  without  special  respect  to  any 
past  or  future  favor ;  or  such  as  were 
vowed  upon  a  condition,  as  when  Jacob 
pledged  himself.  Gen.  28. 20-22,  saying, 
'  If  God  will  be  with  me,  and  will  keep 
me  in  this  way  that  I  go,  and  will  give 
me  bread  to  eat  and  raiment  to  put  on, 
so  tha.t  I  come  again  to  my  father's 
house  in  peace :  then  shall  the  Lord  be 
my  God,  and  this  stone  which  I  have 
set  for  a  pillar  shall  be  God's  house  ; 
and  of  all  that  thou  shalt  give  me  I  will 
surely  give  the  tenth  unto  thee.'  The 
principal  point  in  v.'hich  they  differed 


70 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


offering,  it  shall  be  eaten  the  same 
day  that  he  offerelh  his  sacrifice : 
and  on  the  morrow  also  the  re- 
mainder of  it  shall  be  eaten  : 

17  But  ihe  remainder  of  the  flesh 
of  tlie  sacrifice  on  the  third  day 
shall  be  burnt  with  fire. 


iiiui)  the  preceding  consisted  in  tliis, 
iliat  the  offerer  and  his  friends  were 
required  immediately  to  begin  to  feast 
upon  the  sacrifice,  that  they  might,  if 
possible,  eat  the  whole  of  it  on  that 
day  ;  but  if  this  were  not  easily  practi- 
cable, then  they  might  defer  the  re- 
mainder till  the  second  day.  But  the 
indulgence  was  never  to  be  extended 
beyond  that  time.  Should  any  of  it 
remain  till  the  third  day  it  was  to  be 
burnt ;  and  should  the  offerer  presume 
to  eat  the  least  part  of  it  then,  it  would 
not  only  disannul  the  effect  of  his  sacri- 
fice, but  render  him  unclean  and  guilty 
to  a  high  degree.  Something  analogous 
to  this  obtained  in  the  heathen  worship. 
Bochart  shows  from  Macrobius,  that 
the  Romans  had  a  sacrifice  called  '  Pro- 
tervia,'  in  which  it  was  the  custom,  if 
any  thing  of  the  feast  remained,  to  have 
it  consumed  in  the  fire.  (Hierozoic 
Sac. p.  l,c.50.) — '  As  the  people  of  the 
Kast  generally  cat  their  meat  the  same 
day  on  which  it  is  killed,  and  almost 
never  later  than  the  second  day,  we  are 
inclined  to  concur  in  the  view  of  Harmer 
('  Observations,'  vol.  i.  p.  457)  who 
thinks  that  this  regulation  was  intended 
to  preclude  anyattempt  to  preserve  the 
meat,  by  potting  or  otherwise,  so  that  it 
might  be  taken  to  different  parts  of  the 
country,  and  used  superstitiously,  per- 
haps, as  peculiarly  holy  food,  or  applied 
in  some  way  inconsistent  with  the  in- 
tention of  the  law.  That  intention  was, 
that  what  became  the  offerer's  share  of 
the  sacrifice  he  had  presented,  ho  should 
eat  cheerfully  before  the  Lord  with  his 
friends,  and  that  the  poor  and  destitute 
should  partake  in  the  benefit.  This 
object  was  ensured  by   the  regulation 


18  And  if  any  of  the  flesh  of  the 
sacrifice  of  his  peace-offerings  be 
eaten  at  all  on  the  third  day,  it 
shall  not  be  accepted,  neither  shall 
it  be  p  imputed  unto  him  that  offer- 
eth  it:  it  shall  be  an  qabomina- 


P  Numb.  IS.  27. 
19.7. 


q  ch.  11.  10,  11,  41,  and 


which  precluded  the  meat  from  being 
kept  beyond  the  second  day.' — Pict.Bib. 

IT  A  voluntary  offering,   or  Heb. 

n^lD  nedabah,  a  free'Uill  offering  ^ 
i.  e.  an  offering  not  required  by  any  law, 
but  which  a  person  might  be  prompted 
spontaneously  to  present  as  the  expres- 
sion of  a  grateful  heart. 

IS.  Neither  shall  it  be  imputed  to  him 
that  offereth  it.  Heb.  D"!')!"'  ythdshcb, 
Gr.  ov  \oyisdr](TETai  avroi,  it  shall  not  he 
placed  to  his  account.  He  shall  not  be 
accounted  as  having  made  any  oflering 
at  all.  The  sense  of  the  term  may  be 
more  fully  learned  by  its  use  in  a  pas- 
sage of  opposite  import.  Num.  18. 27,  oO, 
'  And  this  your  heave-offering  shall  be 
reckoned  (jIL'TO  nehshab)  unto  you,  as 
though  it  were  the  corn  of  the  thresh- 
ing-floor, and  as  the  fulness  of  the  wine- 
press. Therefore  thou  shah  say  unto 
them,  When  ye  have  heaved  the  best 
thereof  from  it,  then  it  shall  be  counted 
(-"L"n3  nehshab)  unto  the  Levites  as  the 
increase  of  the  threshing-floor,  and  as 

the  increase    of   the  wine-press.' 

IT  It  shall  be  an  abomination.  Heb. 
bl^S  piggul,  a  polluted,  foul,  fetid 
thing.  The  word  is  peculiar,  and  of 
rare  occurrence.  It  is  met  with  only 
here  and  Lev.  19.  7,  Is.  65.  4,  and  Ezek 
4.  14;  in  all  which  cases  the  leading 
idea  is  plainly  that  of  something  ex- 
ceedingly loathsome  and  offensive,  par- 
ticularly to  the  smell.  Probably  our 
English  word  carrion  comes  the  nearest 
to  a  true  deflniiion.  The  Gr.  here  lias 
fiiaofxa  miasma,  though  it  elsewhere  ren- 
ders  it  by  unsacrificeable  and  profane. 
In  the  version  of  Aquila,  one  of  the 
exactest  of  translators,  the  original  in 
Lev.  19.  7,  is  rendered  azopXrjrov^  Chat 


B.  C.  1490  ] 


CHAPTER  VII. 


71 


lion,  and  the  soul  that  eateth  of  it 
shall  bear  bis  iniquity. 

19  And  the  flesh  that  toucheth 
any  unclean  thing  shall  not  be  eat- 
en ;  it  shall  be  burnt  with  fire  : 
and  as  for  the  flesh,  all  that  be 
clean  shall  eat  thereof 

20  But  the  soul  that  eateth  of  the 
flesh  of  the  sacrifice  of  peace-offer- 
ings that  pertain  unto  the  Lord, 
<■  having  his  uncleanness  upon  hinn, 
even  that  soul  s  shall  be  cut  off 
from  his  people. 

21  Moreover,  the  soul  that  shall 
touch  any  unclean  things  as  t  the 
uncleanness  of  man,  or  any  u  un- 
clean beast,  or  any  w  abominable 
unclean  things  and  eat  of  the  flesh 
o^  I  he  sacrifice  of  peace-offerings 
u^iiich  pertain  unto  the  Lord,  even 
that  soul  X  shall  be  cut  off  from  his 
people. 

22  H  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

'  ch.  15.  3.    s  Gen.  17.  14.     '  ch.  1'2.  and  13. 
and   15.     u  ch.  11.    24,  28.     ""  Ezek.  4.    14. 
J<  ver,  20. 


which  is  to  be  rejected,  and  accordantly 
Willi  this  the  apostle,  1  Tim,  4.  14, 
speaking  of  certain  meats  which  were 
noi  to  be  rejected,  makes  use  of  precise- 
ly ihe  same  term. IF  Shall  bear  his 

iniquity.  That  is,  the  punishment  of 
his  iniquity.  This  law  is  repeated,  and 
the  sanction  enforced,  with  fearful  em- 
phasis, in  Lev.  19.  5-8:  'And  if  ye 
offer  a  sacrifice  of  peace-offerings  unto 
the  Lord,  ye  shall  offer  it  at  your  own 
will.  It  shall  be  eaten  the  same  day 
ye  offer  it,  and  on  the  morrow :  and  if 
aught  remain  until  the  third  day,  it 
shall  be  burnt  in  the  fire.  And  if  it  be 
eaten  at  all  on  the  third  day,  it  is  abomi- 
nable ;  it  shall  not  be  accepted.  There- 
fore every  one  that  eateth  it  shall  bear 
his  iniquity,  because  he  hath  profaned 
the  hallowed  thing  of  the  Lord  ;  and 
that  soul  shall  be  cut  off  from  among 
his  people.' 

19.  And  the  flesh  that  toucheth.    Chal. 


23  Speak  unto  the  children  of 
Israel,  saying,  y  Ye  shall  eat  no 
manner  of  fat,  of  ox,  or  of  sheep, 
or  of  goat. 

24  And  the  fat  of  the  7.  beast  that 
dieth  of  itself,  and  the  fat  of  that 
which  is  torn  with  beasts,  may  be 
used  in  any  other  use :  but  ye  shall 
in  no  wise  eat  of  it. 

25  For  whosoever  eateth  the  fat 
of  the  beast,  of  which  men  offer 
an  offering  made  by  fire  unto  the 
Lord,  even  the  soul  that  eateth  it 
shall  be  cut  off  from  his  people. 

26  a  Moreover,  ye  shall  eat  no 
manner  of  blood,  whether  it  be  of 
fowl  or  of  beast,  in  any  of  your 
dwellings. 

27  Whatsoever  soul  it  be  that 
eateth  any  manner  of  blood,  even 
that  soul  shall  be  cut  off  from  his 
people. 

28  ^  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

y  ch.  3.  17.  ^  ch.  17.  15.  Deut.  14.  21. 
Ezek.  4.  14,  and  44.  31.  »  Gen.  9.  4.  ch.  3. 
17,  and  17.  10—14. 

'The  holy  flesh;'  so  called  from  its 
being  consecrated  to  holy  purposes. 
This  polluting  contact  might  happen 
while  tlie  flesh  of  the  peace-offerings 
was  being  carried  from  the  altar  to  the 

place  where  it  was  eaten. IT  As  for 

the  flesh.  That  is,  all  the  flesh  that 
w^s  not  defiled  by  touching  any  unclean 
thing. 

20.  Even  that  soul  shall  be  cut  off 
from  his  people.  See  this  phrase  ex- 
plained in  the  Note  on  Gen.  17.  14. 
Chal.  '  That  man  shall  be  destroyed.' 
Or.  a-oXeiTat,  shall  perish. 

Prohibition  of  Fat  and  Blood. 
23-27.  No  manner  of  fat,  of  ox,  or 
of  sheep,  ^c.  This  explains  and  limits 
the  precept  contained  Lev.  3.  17,  re- 
stricting it  to  the  fat  of  the  three  kinds 
of  animals  offered  in  sacrifice.  We 
may  perhaps  recognize  some  physical 
as  well  as  moral  reasons  for  this  pro- 


72 


LEVITICIT.- 


[B.  C.  1490. 


29  Speak  unto  the  children  of 
Israel,  saying,  ^He  that  offereth 
the  sacrifice  of  his  peace-offerings 
Unto  the  Lord,  shall  bring  his  ob- 
lation unto  the  Lord  of  the  sacri- 
fice of  his  peace-offerings. 

80  cPlis  own  hands  shall  bring 
•lie  offerings  of  the  Lord  made  by 
lire;  the  fat  with  the  breast,  it 
.-;i;i!l  lie  bring,  that  ''the  breast 
raay  be  waved /or  a  wave-offering 
before  the  Lord. 

31  e  And  the  priest  shall  burn  the 
fat  upon  the  altar :  f  but  the  breast 
sliall  be  Aaron's  and  his  sons'. 

'>  ch.  3.  1.  c  ch.  3.  3,  4,  9,  14.  ^  Exod.  29. 
24,  27.  ch.  8.  27,  and  9.  21.  Numb.  6.  20. 
'  ch.  3.5,  11,  16.     fver.  34. 

hihiiioii,  '  Medically  considered,  fal  is 
certainly  unwholesome,  and  particularly 
so  in  warm  climates.  Besides  this,  the 
eating  of  the  fat  pieces  in  question,  and 
the  use  offal  in  the  preparation  of  food, 
is  highly  injurious  to  persons  particu- 
larly subject  to  cutaneous  disorders,  as 
the  Israelites  seem  to  have  been.  To 
this  we  may  add,  that,  as  it  was  an 
object  of  many  laws  to  discourage  any 
friendly  intercourse  between  the  Israel- 
ites and  the  idolatrous  nations,  nothing 
could  be  better  calculated  than  the  pre- 
sent and  other  dietetic  regulations,  to 
prevent  them  from  joining  in  the  festiv- 
ities  and  social  entertainments  of  iheir 
neighbors.' — Pict.  Bib.  The  prohibi- 
tion of  blood  is  more  general,  because 
thv?  fat  was  offered  to  God  only  by  way 
of  acknowledgment  ;  but  the  blood 
made  atonement  for  the  soul,  and  so 
typified  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  much 
more  clearly  than  the  burning  of  fat ; 
to  this,  therefore,  a  greater  reverence 
must  be  paid,  till  those  types  had  their 
accomplishment  in  the  offering  up  of 
the  body  of  Christ  once  for  all.  The 
Jews  rightly  expound  this  law  as  for- 
bidding only  the  blood  of  the  life,  as 
they  express  it,  not  that  v/hich  we  call 
the  gravy,  for  of  that  they  supposed  it 
was  lawful  to  eat. 


32  And  s  the  right  shoulder  shall 
ye  give  unto  the  priest/or  a  heave- 
offering  of  the  sacritices  of  your 
peace-offerings. 

33  He  among  the  sons  of  Aaron 
that  offereth  the  blood  of  the 
peace-offerings,  and  the  fat,  shall 
have  the  right  shoulder  for  his  part. 

34  For  h  the  wave-breast  and  the 
heave-shoulder  have  I  taken  of  the 
children  of  Israel  from  off  the  sac- 
rifices of  their  peace-ofierings,  and 
have  given  them  unto  Aaron  the 
priest,  and  unto  his  sons,  by  a  stat- 
ute for  ever,  from  among  the  child- 
ren of  Israel. 

s  ver.  34.  ch.  9.  21.  Numb.  6.  20.  h  E.xod. 
29.  28.  ch.  10.  14,  15.  Numb.  13.  18.  19. 
Deut.  18.  3. 


Rules  regulating  the  Priests'  portion 
in  the  Peace-offerings. 

29.  He  that  offereth,  ^c.  The  drift 
of  this  verse  is  not  very  obvious. 
Patrick  suggests  that  it  is  de.signed  to 
convey  the  intimation  that  before  the 
offerer  and  his  friends  feasted  together, 
v.  15-18,  he  was  to  take  care  out  of  the 
sacrifice  of  his  peace-offerings, '  to  bring 
his  oblation  unto  the  Lord  ;'  i.  e.  to  see 
that  God  had  first  his  part  of  the  peace- 
offering,  for  until  that  was  done,  no  one 
could  lawfully  have  any  thing  to  do  with 
the  remainder.  This  interpretation  we 
have,  on  the  whole,  little  hesitation  in 
adopting. 

30.  His  own  hands  shall  bring,  fyc. 
That  is,  it  was  an  act  which  the  offerer 
himself  was  to  perform  ;  and  yet  we 
learn  elsewhere  that  this  was  not  to  be 
independently  of  the  agency  of  the 
priest.  For  the  sacrifice  being  slain 
and  duly  divided,  the  priest  was  to  put 
what  belonged  to  the  Lord,  viz.  the  fat 
with  the  breast  and  the  shoulder,  into 
the  offerer's  own  hands,  that  he  might 
present  it  himself  to  the  Divine  Ma- 
jesty. This  was  to  be  done  with  a 
waving  motion  upward,  in  token  of  his 
devoutly  proffering  and  delivering  it 
over  to  God  as  Lordof  heaven  and  earth. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  VIL 


73 


35  H  This  is  the  portion  of  the 
anointing  of  Aaron,  and  of  the 
anointing  of  his  sons,  out  of  the 
offerings  of  the  Lord  made  by  fire, 
in  the  daj'  u'he?i  he  presented  them 
to  minister  unto  the  Lord  in  the 
priest's  office ; 

36  Which  the  Lord  commanded 
to  be  given  them  of  the  children 
of  Israel,  i  in  the  day  that  he  anoint- 
ed them,  by  a  statute  for  ever 
throughout  their  generations. 

'■  ch  8.  12,  30    Exod  40.  13,  15.    kch.  G  9. 

The  act  im))lied  also  an  atlcnowledg- 
rnent  th;it  every  good  thing  came  down 
from  God,  and  an  intimation  that  all  the 
ways  of  his  peoph^  should  fen^i  vpirard, 
so  ihat  their  conversation  should  be  in 
hf  aven. 

35.  This  is  tlie  portion  of  the  anomt- 
ing,  S,-c.  Heb.  mr!^  Tb^T  zotli  mish- 
hath,  this  is  the  anointing  of  Aaron,  &c. 
That  is,  this  wave-breast  and  heave- 
shoulder  are  the  portion  or  privilege 
arising  from  their  being  anointed  and 
consecrated  to  the  priesthood.  That 
the  allusion  is  to  the  '  portion,'  is  evi- 
dent from  the  preceding  and  succeeding 
context  ;  and  in  v.  36,  it  is  said,  •'  which 
the  Lord  commanded  to  be  given  them,' 
&c.  As  for  '  anointing'  being  used  for 
'  anointed  ones,'  it  is  a  phraseology 
similar  to  that  by  which  '  dreams '  is 
put  for  '  dreamers,'  Jer.  27.  9,  '  spirits  ' 
for  '  spiritual  gifts,'  1  Cor.  14.  12, 
'  thanksgivings  '  for  *  companies  of 
ihanksgivers,'  Num.  12.  31,  'circum- 
cision '  for  '  persons  circumcised,'  Rom. 
2.  26, '  divination  '  for  the  '  rewards  of 
divination,' Num.  22.7,  'iniquity'  for 
the  '  punishment  or  desert  of  iniquity,' 
Lev.  7.  18,  Job  11.  6,  and  so  in  numer- 
ous other  instances. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

The    Consecration  of  Aaron  and  his 

sons  to  the  Priesthood. 

The  sacred  writer  here  passes  from 

sacred  things  to  sacred  persons.     The 

7 


.37  This  is  the  law  k  of  the  burnt- 
offering,  1  of  the  meat-offering,  m  and 
of  the  sin-offering,  nand  of  the  ires- 
pass-offering,  oand   of  the  conse- 
I  crations,  and  p  of  the  sacrifice  of  the 
peace-offerings; 
j    3S   Which  the  Lord  commanded 
j  Moses  in  mount  Sinai,  in  the  day 
j  that  he  commanded  the  children 
I  of  Israel   q  to  offer  their  oblations 
unto  the  Lord,  in  the  wilderness 
of  Sinai. 

1  ch.  6.  14.     L-i  ch.  6.    25.      n  xer.  1.     o  ch. 
6.20.     Exod.  29.  1.     Pver.  11.     q  ch.  1.  2. 

present  cliapter  describes  the  ceremonies 
I  previously  ordained  which  marked  the 
I  induction  of  Aaron  and  his  sons  into 
'  the  priestly  ofiice.  Most  of  the  rites, 
however,  peculiar  to  this  occasion,  are 
the  same  with  those  commanded  Ex.29, 
and  v.hich  are  there  explained  at  length. 
Consequently  but  brief  comments  will 
be  requisite  in  this  connexion.  It  may 
suffice  simply  to  remark,  that  the  priest- 
hood  was  originally  appointed  to  remain 
in  Aaron's  family  through  all  succeed- 
ing generations,  and  no  one  who  was 
I  not  of  that  lineage  might  on  any  ac- 
count intrude  into  the  sacred  office. 
Aaron  was  succeeded  by  Eleazar,  his 
eldest  surviving  son,  after  the  death  of 
Nadab  and  Abihu,  and  it  continued  in 
his  family  through  seven  generations, 
till  the  time  of  Eli.  On  his  death  it 
was  removed  from  that  branch  for  the 
wickedness  of  Eli's  sons,  and  given  to 
the  descendants  of  Ilhamar,  Aaron's 
other  son.  In  the  time  of  Solomon  it 
returned  again  into  the  line  of  Eleazar, 
in  which  it  continued  till  the  Babylonish 
captivity.  Jeshua,  the  first  high  priest 
after  the  return  of  the  Jews,  was  of  the 
same  family;  but  after  his  time  the 
appointment  became  very  uncertain  and 
irregidar  ;  and  after  Judea  became  a 
Roman  province,  no  regard  whatever 
was  paid  to  this  part  of  the  original 
divine  institution.  The  office  was  in 
fact  in  process  of  time  so  far  desecrated 
in  the  general  corruption,  that  it  was 


74 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


CHAPTER  VIII.  j 

A  ND  the  LoKD  spake  unto  Mo- 1 

-^^  ses,  saying,  i 

2  a  Take  Aaron  and  his  sons  with  I 
hin),  and  ^  llie  garments,  and  c  the  I 
anointing  oil,  and  a  bullock  for  the  | 
sin-offering,  and  two  rams,  and  a 
basket  of  unleavened  bread  ;  | 

3  And  gather  thou  all  the  con- 1 
gregaiion  together  unto  the  door  of  ^ 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 

a  Exod.  29.  ],  a,  3.  b  Exod.  23.  2,  4. 
«:  Exod.  30.  24,  25. 

often  sold  to  llie  highest  bidder,  whether 
of  the  family  or  not ;  and  so  things  con- 
tinued, till  linally  the  nation  had  filled 
up  the  measure  of  its  iniquities,  and 
priest,  altar,  and  temple  were  all  swept 
away  in  the  abolilion  of  the  Jewish 
economy  and  the  dispersion  of  the  race. 

2.  Take  Aaron  and  his  sons  with  him, 
and  the  garments.  That  is,  the  holy 
priestly  garments  which  God  had  be- 
fore commanded  to  be  made,  and  which 
vere  now  ready. 

3.  Gather  thou  all  the  congregation. 
That  is,  the  elders  and  principal  men 
of  the  congregation,  who  represented 
the  body  of  the  people,  as  the  court 
■would  hold  but  few  of  the  many  thou- 
sands of  Israel.  This  is  confirmed  by 
Lev.  9.  1,  where  Moses  is  said  to  have 
called  the  elders  together  instead  of  the 
whole  congregation,  as  here. 

4.  Thcassembly  was  gathered  together. 
Heb.  m5  tdah  ;  the  same  word  with 
that  rendered  *  congregation '  in  v.  2, 
and  which  ought  here  also,  for  uniform- 
ity's sake,  to  have  been  rendered  in  the 
same  way.  The  nature  and  objects  of 
the  Leviiical  priesthood  were  such  as 
to  make  a  large  attendance  of  the  heads 
of  the  people  proper  in  itself,  and  they 
•»vould  moreover  serve  as  witnesses  that 
Aaron  and  his  sons  were  not  intruders 
into  the  sacred  office,  but  solemnly  and 
specially  inducted  into  it,  according  to 
the  express  appointment  of  Jehovah 
himself. 


4  And  Moses  did  as  the  Lof.d 
commanded  him  ;  and  the  assem- 
bly was  gathered  together  unto 
the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation. 

5  And  Moses  said  unto  the  con- 
gregation, d  This  IS  the  thing  which 
the  Lord  commanded  to  be  done. 

6  And  Moses  brought  Aaron  and 
his  sons,  eand  washed  ihem  with 
water. 

d  Exod.  29.  4.     c  Exod.  29.  4. 

5.  This  is  the  thing  which  the  Lord 
commanded  to  be  done.  q.  d.  I  am  now 
about  to  enter  upon  that  work  which 
the  Lord  commanded  when  I  was  with 
him  in  the  holy  mount,  Ex.  29.  4.  And 
so  throughout  the  remainder  of  the 
present  chapter,  whatever  portions  of 
it  are  left  unexplained,  they  will  be 
found  illustrated  in  the  corresponding 
chapter  in  Exodus. 

6.  Washed  them  with  water.  That  is, 
caused  them  to  wash  themselves.  See 
upon  this  ceremony  of  ablution  the  Note 
on  Ex.  29.  4.  We  may  give,  however, 
in  this  connexion  the  following  note 
from  the  Pictorial  Bible.  'Here  the 
ceremonies  of  consecration  commence 
with  ablutions,  and  we  have  seen  that 
the  priests  were  required  to  bathe  their 
hands  and  feet  whenever  they  entered 
the  tabernacle.  This,  doubtless,  was 
not  merely  to  ensure  physical  cleanness, 
but  also  to  symbolize  that  spiritual 
purity  with  which  man  should  appear 
before  God.  The  present  washing, 
however,  is  distinguished  from  the  daily 
ablution  ;  inasmuch  as  the  whole  per- 
son seems  now  to  have  been  washed, 
but  only  the  hands  and  feet  on  common 
occasions.  The  idea  of  the  fitness  of 
such  a  practice  is  so  obvious,  tliat  it 
has  been  more  or  less  in  use  in  most 
religious  systems.  We  find  at  the 
heathen  temples,  lavers  of  a  similar 
use  to  this  at  the  tabernacle.  The 
Egyptian  priests  washed  themselves 
with  cold  water  twice  every  day,  and 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


75 


twice  at  night ;  the  Greeks  had  their 
sprinklings,  the  Romans  their  lustra- 
tions and  lavatioiis  ;  the  ancient  Chris- 
tians  practised  ablution  before  receiving 
llie  sacrament,  and  also  bathed  their 
eyes  on  entering  a  church.  The  Roman 
Calliolic  church  retains  something  of 
liie  practice  of  ablution  before,  and 
sometimes  after  mass  ;  and  Calmet 
says  that  the  holy-water  vessels  at  the 
entrance  of  their  churches  are  in  imita- 
tion ol'  the  lavcr  of  the  tabernacle.  The 
oriental  Clnistians  have  also  their 
solenni  wasliings  on  particular  occa- 
sions, such  as  Good  Friday.  The  prac- 
tice of  ablution  was  adopted  by  Maliom- 
raed  in  a  very  full  sense  ;  for  his  follow- 
ers are  not  only  obliged  to  perform 
iheir  abluaons  before  they  enter  a 
mosque,  but  before  they  commence  the 
prayers,  wherever  offered,  which  they 
are  required  to  repeat  five  times  each 
day.  This  is  certainly  the  most  bur- 
densome system  of  ablutioa  which  ever 
existed  in  ancient  or  modern  times. 
The  Hindoos  also  rejoice  in  the  purify- 
ing virtues  of  their  idolized  Ganges,  and 
wash  also  in  other  waters,  because  they 
believe  that  such  will  be  equally  effect- 
ual, if,  whilst  th  y  bathe,  they  say,  'O 
Ganges,  purify  me  !'  In  fact,  nothing 
is  or  has  been  more  common  than  ablu- 
tions in  tlie  worship  which  different 
nations  render  to  their  gods  ;  and  there 
are  few  acts  connected  with  their  ser- 
vice which  are  not  begun  or  ended  with 
some  rile  symbolical  of  purification. 
In  the  religion  of  classical  antiquity, 
the  priest  was  obliged  to  prepare  him- 
self by  ablution  for  offering  sacrifice; 
for  which  purpose  there  was  usually 
water  at  the  entrance  of  the  teniple.  In 
very  ancient  times  the  priests  seem  to 
have  previously  bathed  themselves  in 
some  river  or  stream.  But  such  ablu- 
tions were  only  necessary  in  sacrifices 
to  the  celestial  gods,  sprinkling  being 
suflScient  for  the  terrestrial  and  infernal 
deities.  (See  Banier's  '  Mythology  of 
the  Ancients,'  vol.  1.  p.  271.) — We  may 
here  observe,  that,  from  the  obligation 


of  the  priests  to  wash  their  feet  before 
entering  the  tabernacle,  and  for  other 
reasons,  it  has  been  inferred  that  they 
officiated  with  bare  feet.     It  is  also  ob- 
served,  that  in  the  enumeration  of  the 
articles  of  the  priestly  dress,  sandals 
are  not  mentioned,  neither  does  Jose- 
phus  in  his  account  speak  of  them.     It 
is   true   that    Plutarcii   represents    the 
Hebrew  priest  as  officiating  with  bus- 
kins ;  but  his  authority  is  of  the  least 
possible  weight  on  such  a  subject.     We 
believe  ourselves  that  the  priests  did 
officiate  barefoot,  althougii  our  convic- 
tion does  not  proceed  from  the  reasons 
thus  stated  ;  but  rather  from  the  knowl- 
edge that  it  was  in  very  ancient  times, 
asat  present,a  conmion  mark  oi' respect 
in  the  East  to  uncover  the  feet.     (See 
Note  on  Exod.  3.  6.)     Even  classical 
heathenism  affords   instances    of   this 
usage.    '  Adore  and  sacrifice  with  naked 
feet,'   was    a    maxim    of   Pythagoras, 
which  he   probably  brought,  with  the 
rest  of  his  philosophy,  from  the  East. 
The  temple  of  Diana  at  Crete  might  not 
be  entered  with  covered  feet  ;  the  Ro- 
man ladies  were   obliged  to  be  barefoot 
in  the  temple  of  Vesta  ;  and  the  suppli- 
ants went   barefoot   to   the  temple  of 
Jupiter  when  they  prayed  for  rain.    The 
Mohammedans,   and   the    Asiatic    and 
Abyssinian  Christians,  invariably  take 
off  their  shoes  before  tliey  enter  a  place 
of  worship,  as  do  the  Brahmins  of  India 
when  they  enter  their  temples.     As  to 
the  Jews  themselves,  it  is  impossible  to 
say,  unless  by  inference,  what  they  did 
in  the  tabernacle  ;  but  it  seems  fair, to 
conclude  that  they  did  the  same  as  after- 
wards in   the  Temple,  and  that  they 
th.ere   officiated   barefoot  we   have  the 
concurrent  testimony  of  various  writers. 
Maimonides  says  that  none  were  allow- 
ed to  enter  the  Temple  with  shoes,  or 
with  unclean  feet.^or  with  a  staff,  or  in 
the  dress  in  which  they  worked  at  their 
respective   callings.      The  Talmud    is 
positive  on   the  same   subject,  saying 
that  no  priest  or  layman   might  enter 
with  shoes  ;  but  as  this  regulation,  in 


76 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


7  fAnd  he  put  upon  him  the 
gcoat,  and  girded  him  with  the 
girdle,  and  clothed  him  with  the 
robe,  and  put  the  eohod  upon  him, 
and  he  girded  him  wit.i  tne  curious 
girdle  of  the  ephod,  and  bound  it 
unto  him  therewith. 

8  And  he  put  the  breast-plate 
upon  him:  also  he  i^put  in  the 
breast-plate  the  Urim  and  the 
Thurnmim. 

9  i  And  he  put  the  mitre  upon  his 
head;  also  upon  the  mitre,  even 
upon  his  fore-front,  did  he  put  the 

f  Exod.  -20.  5.  e  Esod.  2S  4.  h  Exod. 
23.  30.     i  Exod.  -29.  6. 

conjuiK'tion  with  their  way  of  life  and 
the  lliiniifss  of  their  official  dress,  was 
injurious  to  their  health,  there  was  a 
small  apartment  or  closet,  called  the 
'stove'  or  'fire-room,'  which  had  a 
heated  floor,  on  which  tlie  priests  might 
occasionally  warm  their  feet.  (See 
Saurin's  'Dissertations,'  44.  and  45.; 
Cabnet's  '  Commontaire  Litttral,'  on 
Exod.  3.  5,  and  30.  IS,  &c.)' 

7.  And  he  put  upon  him  the  coat,  4"C. 
It  would  seem  tliat  Moses  on  this  occa- 
sion, by  an  extraordinary  commission 
from  God,  executed  himself  the  office 
of  High-Priest  on  this  and  the  six  fol- 
lowing days. 

8.  He  put  in  the  breast-plate  the  Urim 
and  Thurnmim.    See  Note  on  Ex.  2S.  30. 

10.  Anointed  the  tabernacle.  Prob- 
ably by  pulling  his  finger  in  the  oil 
and  then  smearing  it  over  the  tabernacle 
and  its  utensils. 

11.  Anointed  the  altar  and  all  his  ves- 
sels, to  sanctify  them.  The  altar  by 
these  rites  was  sanctified,  so  that 
thenceforward  tlirough  the  sacrifices 
daily  offered  upon  it,  atonement  might 
be  made  for  the  sins  of  the  people, 
whereas  afterwards  the  altar  was  to  be 
considered  as  sanctifying  the  gifts  and 
oblations  laid  upon  it,  according  to 
Mat.  23.  19,  '  Ye  fools  and  blind  ;  for 
whether  is  greater,  the  gift,  or  the  altar 
that  sanctificth  the  gift.' 


golden  plate,  the  holy  crown;  as 
the  Lord  ^  commanded  Moses. 

10  » And  Moses  took  the  anointing 
oil.  and  anointed  the  tabernacle 
and  all  that  icas  therein,  and  sanc- 
tified them. 

11  And  he  sprinkled  thereof  upon 
the  altar  seven  times,  and  anointed 
the  altar  and  all  his  vessels,  boih 
the  laver  and  his  foot,  to  sanctify 
them. 

12  And  he  m  poured  of  the  anoint- 
ing oil  upon  Aaron's  head,  and 
anointed  him,  to  sanctify  him. 

k  Exod.  28.  37,  &c.  '  Exod.  30.  26,  -21,  SS, 
29.  m  ch.  21. 10,  U.  Exod.  29.  7,  and  30.  30, 
Ps.  133.  2. 


12.  Poured  of  the  anointing  oil  upon 
Aaron's  head,  and  anointed  him,  to  sane- 
tify  him.  That  is,  to  set  him  apart  to 
his  office.  '  From  comparing  this  verse 
with  V,  30,  it  is  thought  that  Aaron 
alone  was  anointed  on  the  head,  his 
sons  being  merely  sprinkled ;  or,  as  we 
should  understand,  that  Aaron  was 
sprinkled  in  common  wilh  his  sons,  but 
that  the  anointing  or  pouring  out  of  oil 
upon  his  head  was  an  addition  peculiar 
to  him.  The  custom  of  setting  persons 
apart  for  particularly  dignified  or  holy 
offices,  by  anointing,  seems  to  have 
originated  in  the  East,  and  in  most 
cases  appears  to  have  symbolized  the 
effusion  of  the-  gifts  and  graces  which 
they  were  pre,sumed  to  receive  from 
heaven  to  qualify  them  for  distinguished 
offices.  Hence  this  sacred  anointing 
seems  to  have  been  considered  as  invest- 
ing wilh  a  peculiar  sanctity  the  person 
on  whom  it  had  been  conferred.  We 
see  this  in  the  reverence  with  which 
'the  Lord's  anointed'  is  on  all  occa- 
sions  mentioned  in  Scripture.  The  per- 
sons set  apart  to  their  offices  by  anoint- 
ing, among  the  Hebrews,  were  the 
priests,  kings,  and  prophets  ;  but  there 
is  some  doubt  about  the  latter,  to  which 
we  shall  have  occasion  to  advert,  as 
well  as  to  the  unction  of  the  kings. 
The  precious  oil  seems  to  have  been 
more  profusely  expended  on  Aaron  thao 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


77 


13  nAnd  Moses  brought  Aaron's 
sons,  and  put  coats  upon  them,  and 
girded  them  with  girdles,  and  put 
bonnets  upon  them;  as  the  Lord 
commanded  Moses. 

14  oAnd  be  brought  the  bullock 
fiir  the  sin-oftt«ring  :  and  Aaron  and 
his  sons  plaid  their  hands  upon  the 
head  of  the  bullock  for  the  sin- 
ciferino:. 

15  And  he  slew  it;  qand  Moses 
took  the  blood,  and  put  it  upon  the 
horns  of  the  altar  round  about  with 
his  tinger,  and  purified  the  altar, 
and  poured  the  blood  at  the  bottom 
ol'  the  aliar,  and  sanctified  it,  to 
itiaice  reconciliation  upon  it. 

If)  ''And  he  took  all  the  fat  that 
ivas  upon  the  inwards,  and  the  caul 
odovc  the  liver,  and  the  two  kid- 
i\f^y^,  and  their  fat,  and  Moses 
burned  il  upon  the  altar. 

17  But  the  bullock,  and  his  hide, 
ills  fiesh,  and  his  dung,  he  burnt 
with  fire  without  the  camp;  as 
the  Lord  s commanded  Moses. 

IS  "ii  'And  he  brought  the  ram 
fur  the  burnt-offering:  and  Aaron 
and  his  sons  laid  their  hands  upon 
iht'  head  of  the  ram. 

19  And  he  killed  it;  and  Moses 
sprinkled  the  blood  upon  the  altar 
round  about. 

20  And    he    cut    the    ram    into 

n  Exod.  29.  S  9.  o  Exod.  29.  10.  Ezek. 
43  19.  Pch.  4.4.  q  Exod.  29.12,  3G.  ch. 
4.  7.  Ezek.  43.  20,  26.  Heb.  9.  22.  r  Exod. 
29.  13.  cl).  4.  8.  s  ch  4.  11,  12,  Exod.  29. 
11.     t  Exod.  29.  15 

ill  any  other  application.  We  learn 
IVniii  Ps.  132.  2,  that  being  poured  on 
his  head,  il  ran  down  on  his  beard  and 
to  the  collar  of  his  coal  (the  robeof  ihe 
eplidd) — not  to  the  skirts  of  his  gar- 
ments, as  lliere  translated.  Tiie  Jew- 
ish  writers  have  many  fancies  about  the 
mode  in  which  ihe  oil  was  applied,  into 
which  we  need  not  enter.  If  the  high- 
priest  was,  as  some  stale,  fully  robed 
before  anointed,  the  mitre  might  have 
oeen  taken  off  for  that  ceremony:  but 
7* 


pieces;  and  Moses  burnt  the  head, 
and  the  pieces,  and  the  fat. 

21  And  he  washed  the  inwards 
and  the  legs  in  water;  and  Moses 
burnt  the  whole  ram  upon  the 
altar:  it  icas  a  burnt-sacrifice  for  a 
sweet  savour,  afid  an  offering  made 
by  fire  unto  the  Lord;  uas  the 
Lord  commanded  Moses. 

22  II  And  w  he  brought  the  other 
ram,  the  ram  of  consecration  :  and 
Aaron  and  his  sons  laid  their  hands 
upon  the  head  of  the  ram. 

23  And  he  slew  it;  and  Moses 
took  of  the  blood  of  it,  and  put  it 
upon  the  tip  of  Aaron's  ri|^ht  ear, 
and  upon  the  thumb  of  his  right 
hand,  and  upon  the  great  toe  of  his 
right  foot. 

24  And  he  brought  Aaron's  son's, 
and  Moses  put  of  the  blood  upon 
the  tip  of  their  right  ear,  and  upon 
the  thumbs  of  their  right  hands, 
and  upon  the  great  toes  of  their 
right  feet:  and  Moses  sprinkled 
the  blood  upon  the  altar  round 
about. 

25  xAnd  he  took  the  fat,  and  the 
rump,  and  all  the  fat  that  was  upon 
the  inwards,  and  the  caul  above  the 
liver,  and  the  two  kidneys,  and 
their  fat,  and  the  right  shoulder: 

26  yAnd  out  of  the  basket  of  un- 
leavened bread,  that  icas  before 
the  Lord,  he  took  one  unleavened 


u  Exod.  29,  18.    w  Exod.  29.  19.  31,    x  Exod, 
29.  22.     y  Exod.  29  23. 


others  think  that  the  liara  was  not  put 
on  till  after  the  anointing.' — Pict.  Bib. 
15.  And  he  slew  it ;  and  Muses  took, 
S,-c.  Heb.  nr?2  np''1  t2n"i;*^l  va-yis'kut 
va-yikka'li  moshth.  It  would  not  per- 
haps be  easy  to  show  that  there  is 
any  thing  contrary  to  the  grammatical 
construction  in  rendering  this  passage, 
'  And  Moses  slew  it,  and  took,'  &c.,  bui 
as  the  versions  are  all  in  favor  of  the 
present  rendering,  we  prefer  to  abide 
by  it. 


78 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


one  wafer,  and  put  ihem  on  the  fat, 
and  upon  the  right  shoulder: 

27  And  he  put  all  z  upon  Aaron's 
hands,  and  upon  his  sons'  hands, 
and  waved  \.\\en\  for  a  wave-offer- 
ing before  the  Lord. 

28  a  And  Moses  took  them  from 
off  their  hands,  and  burnt  them  on 
the  altar  upon  the  burni-offering: 
they  were  consecrations  for  a  sweet 
savour :  it  is  an  offering  made  by 
fire  unto  the  LoPwD. 

29  And  Mioses  took  the  breast, 
and  waved  it  for  a  wave-offering 
before  the  Lord  :  for  of  the  ram 
of  consecration  it  was  Moses' 
bpart;  as  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses. 

30  And  c  Moses  took  of  the 
anointing  oil,  and  of  the  blood 
v/hich  teas  upon  the  altar,  and 
sprinkled  it  upon  Aaron,  anf/  upon 
his  garments,  and  upon  his  sons, 
and  upon  his  sons'  garments  with 
him ;  and  sanctified  Aaron,  and 
his  garments,  and  his  sons,  and  his 
sons'  garments  with  him. 

31  II  And  Moses  said  unto  Aaron 

2  Exod.  29.  24,  &c.  ^  Exod.  29.  25.  b  Exod. 
29.  20.  c  Exod.  29.  21,  and  30.  30.  Numb. 
3.  3.     d  Exod.  29.  31,  32. 


33.  Ye  shall  not  go  out  of  the  door  of 
the  tabernacle  in  seven  days.  That  is, 
out  ol"  the  court  of  the  labeniacle,  wiih 
which  door  of  the  tabernacle  is  often 
synoninioLis.  The  Heb.  has  nrS?3 
mippcthah,  which  might  as  well  be  ren- 
dered '  from  the  door,'  as  '  out  of  the 
door,'  for  the  consecration  was  not  per- 
formed u-ithin,  but  at  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle.     The  Gr.  has  very  properly 

OTTO   Ovpai,   from  the    door. IT  For 

seven  days  shall  he  consecrate  you. 
That  is,  Moses  shall  consecrate  you  ; 
for  the  command  of  God  is  here  referred 
to,  and  cited  according  to  the  sense, 
Ex.  29.  35.  So  V.  34,  'as  he  (Moses) 
hath  done.'  The  number  scren  among 
the  Hebrews  was  the  number  of  per- 
fection, and  the  seven  days  of  conse- 


and  to  his  sons,  dBoil  the  flesh  at 
the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation;  and  there  eat  it 
with  the  bread  that  Z5  in  the  basket 
of  consecrations,  as  I  commanded, 
saying,  Aaron  and  his  sons  shall 
eat  it. 

32  cAnd  that  which  remaineth 
of  the  flesh  and  of  the  bread  shall 
ye  burn  with  fire. 

33  And  ye  shall  not  go  out  of  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation in  seven  days,  until  the 
days  of  your  consecration  be  at  an 
end  :  for  f  seven  days  shall  he  con- 
secrate you. 

34  g  As  he  hath  done  this  day,  so 
the  Lord  hath  commanded  to  do, 
to  make  an  atonement  for  you. 

35  Therefore  shall  ye  abide  al 
the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation  day  and  night  seven 
days,  and  h  keep  the  charge  of  the 
Lord,  that  ye  die  not :  for  so  I  am 
commanded. 

36  So  Aaron  and  his  sons  did  all 
things  which  the  Lord  command- 
ed by  the  hand  of  Moses. 

e  Exod.  29.  34.  f  Exod.  29.  30,  35.  Ezek. 
43  25,  2G.  g  Heb.  7.  16.  h  Num.  3.  7,  and 
9.  19.     Dent.  11.  1.     1  Kin?s  2  3. 


cjration  implied  a  full  and  perfect  con- 
secration to  the  sacerdotal  office,  and 
correctly  intimated,  moreover,  that 
their  whole  lives  were  to  be  devoted  to 
this  solemn  service. 

34.  As  he  hath  done  this  day.  That 
is,  as  hath  been  done  ;  another  instance 
of  that  indefinite  phraseolrgy  of  which 
we  have  belore  so  frequently  spoken. 
See  Note  on  Lev.  1.  5.  Thus  also  2 
Sam.  15.  31, '  And  one  told  David,'  i.  e. 
it  was  told  him.  Mark  10.  3,  '  And 
they  brought,'  compared  with  Mat.  19. 
13, '  Then  were  brought.' 


CHAPTER  IX. 
Aaron^s  entrance  on  the  Priestly  Office. 
1.  It  came  to  pass  on  the  eighth  day. 
Not  upon  the  eighth  day  of  the  month, 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  IX, 


79 


CHAPTER  IX. 

AND  ait  came  to  pass  on  the 
eighth  day,  that  Moses  called 
Aaron  and  his  sons,  and  the  elders 
of  Israel ; 

2  And  he  said  unto  Aaron,  b  Take 
tliee  a  young  calf  for  a  sin-offering, 
cand  a  rara  for  a  burnt-offering, 
without  blemish,  and  offer  them 
before  the  Lord. 

3  And  unto  the  children  of  Israel 
ihou  shalt  speak,  saying,  J  Take  ye 
a  kid  o{  tiie  goats  for  a  sin-offer- 
ing;  and  a  calf  and  a  lamb,  both 
of  the  first  year,  without  blemish, 
for  a  burnt-offering ; 

4  Also  a  bullock  and  a  ram  for 


a  Ezek.  43.  27.  b  ch  4.  3,  and  8.  14.  Exod. 
•29  1.  <:  ch.  S,  13.  d  ch.  4.  23.  Ezra  6.  17, 
aud  10.  19. 


hilt  on  the  first  day  after  their  conse^ 
CJ-ation,  which  occupied  seven  days, 
and  before  which  they  were  deemed 
unfit  to  miiuster  in  holy  things,  being 
considered  in  a  state  of  imperfection. 
All  creatures,  for  the  most  part,  were 
considered  as  in  a  state  of  uncleanness 
aiid  imperfection  seven  days,  and  per- 
fected on  the  eighth.  So  here  the 
priests  were  not  admitted  until  the 
eighth  day  to  minister  in  their  office. 

IT  And  the  elders  of  Israel.     Gr. 

mv  yF.povaiav  lapan^',  the  eldership  or 
senate  of  Israel.  These,  together  wiih 
a  large  body  of  the  people,  were  assem- 
bled in  the  court,  v,  23,  24,  where  it 
was  the  duty  of  the  elders  to  impose 
their  hands'upon  the  sin-offering  of  the 
congregation. 

2.  Take  thee  a  young  calf  for  a  sin- 
offering.  Heb.  ^pn  p  ben  bcifcdr,  son 
of  the  herd.  Tl'.is  offt-ring  is  supposed 
by  the  Jewish  w^rilers  to  have  been 
appointed  for  Aaron  in  person,  in  refer- 
ence to  his  sin  in  the  matter  of  the 
golden  calf.  Eut  it  may  be  sufficient  to 
hold  that  this  offering  respected  merely 
the  general  frailties  and  imperfections 
of  Aaron.,  as  one  of  a  fallen  race,  who, 
though  an  high-priest  by  office,  yet  stood 


peace-offerings,  to  sacrifice  before 
the  Lord;  and  ea  meat-offering 
mingled  with  oil:  for  f to-day  the 
Lord  will  appear  unto  you. 

5  ^  And  they  brought'/Aaf  which 
Moses  commanded  before  the  tab- 
ernacle of  the  congregation :  and 
all  the  congregation  drew  near  and 
stood  before  the  Lord. 

6  And  Moses  said.  This  is  the 
thing  which  the  Lord  commanded 
that  ye  should  do  :  and  g  the  glory 
of  the  Lord  shall  appear  unto  you. 

7  And  Moses  said  unto  Aaron, 
Go  unto  the  altar,  and  h  offer  thy 
sin-offering,  and  thy  burnt- offering, 
and  make  an  atonement  for  thyself, 

e  ch.  2.  4.  f  ver.  6  23.  Exod.  29.  43. 
S  ver.  23.  Exod.  U.  16.  h  ch.  4  3.  1  Sam. 
3.  14.     Heb.  5.  3,  and  7.  27,  and  9.  7. 


in  as  much  need  of  an  atonement  as  any 
of  the  people  whom  he  represented. 

4.  To-day  the  Lord  shall  appear  unto 
you.  That  is,  the  visible  glory  of  the 
Lord  will  appear  in  the  increased  efful- 
gence of  the  cloudy  pillar  resting  over 
the  tabernacle,  and  also  in  sending  forth 
from  the  midst  of  the  cloud  a  fire  to 
consume  the  offerings  upon  the  altar. 
Chal. '  The  glory  of  the  Lord  shall  be 
revealed.'  Conip.  v.  6.  By  reason  of 
this  expected  appearance,  the  people 
were  to  prepare  and  sanctify  themselves 
by  every  kind  of  sacrifice,  in  allusion  to 
which  it  is  said  of  a  still  more  glorious 
aj)pearance,  of  which  this  was  a  shadow, 
1  John  2.  3,  *  We  know  that  when  he 
shall  appear  we  shall  be  like  him,  for 
we  shall  see  him  as  he  is.  And  every 
man  that  hath  this  hope  in  him  purifieih 
himself  as  he  is  pure.' 

5.  All  the  congregation  drew  near  and 
stood  before  the  Lord.  That  is,  before 
thesanctuary,  in  the  court  ;  before  the 
dwelling-place  of  the  Lord's  glory. 

7.  Go  unto  the  altar  and  offer,  ^c. 
These  further  prescribed  offerings,  so 
immediately  succeeding  those  which 
had  been  offered  at  the  consecration, 
show  very  forcibly  the   consciousness 


80 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


and  for  the  people  :  and  i  offer  the 
offering  of  the  people,  and  make  an 
atonement  for  them;  as  the  Lord 
commanded. 

8  H  Aaron  therefore  went  unto 
the  altar,  and  slew  the  calf  of  the 
sin-offering,  which  was  for  himself. 

9  k  And  the  sons  of  Aaron  brought 
the  blood  unto  him :  and  he  .dipped 
his  finger  in  the  blood,  and  iput  it 
upon  the  horns  of  the  altar,  and 
poured  out  the  blood  at  the  bottom 
of  the  altar: 

10  m  But  the  fat,  and  the  kidneys, 
and  the  caul  above  the  liver  of  the 
sin-offering,  he  burnt  upon  the 
altar;  »  as  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses. 

11  o  And  the  flesh  and  the  hide  he 

>  ch.  4.  16,  20.  Heb.  5.  1.  k  ch.  8.  15. 
I  See  ch.  4.  7.     m  ch.  8.  16.     n  ch.  4.  8. 


burnt  with  fire  without  the  camp 

12  And  he  slew  the  burnt-offer- 
ing; and  Aaron's  sons  presented 
unto  him  the  blood,  p  which  he 
sprinkled  round  about  upon  the 
altar. 

13  qAnd  they  presented  the 
burnt-offering  unto  him,  with  the 

'  pieces  thereof,  and  the  head  :  and 
he  burnt  them  upon  the  altar. 

14  'And  he  did  wash  the  inwards 
and  the  legs,  and  burnt  them  upon 
the  burnt-offering  on  the  altar. 

15  1[  s  And  he  brought  the  people's 
offering,  and  took  the  goat  which 
icas  the  sin-offering  for  the  people, 
and  slew  it,  and  offered  it  for  sin, 
as  the  first. 

o  ch.  4.  11,  and  8.  17.  P  ch.  1.  5,  and 
8.  19.  q  ch.  8.  20.  r  ch.  8.  21.  s  yer.  3. 
Isa.  53.  10.     Heb.  2.  17,  and  5.  3. 


which  even  the  holiest  and  most  ac- 
cepted persons  ought  to  entertain  of 
their  own  sinfulness.  Those  who  are 
holy  by  office  are  stiJl  to  know  and  con- 
fess that  ihey  are  sinners  by  nature, 
even  as  others. 

8.  Aaron  therefore  went  unto  the 
altar.  These  being  the  first  offerings 
that  were  ever  offered  by  the  Levitical 
priesthood,  according  to  the  newly 
enacted  law  of  sacrifices,  the  manner  of 
offering  them  is  particularly  related, 
that  it  might  appear  how  exactly  they 
agreed  with  the  institution.  Aaron  was 
first  required  to  make  expiation  for 
himself,    that    he    might    thereby    be 

qualified  to  do  it  for  the  people. 

^r  Aiid  slew  the  calf.  This  olten  im- 
plies no  more  than  ordered,  procured, 
i>r  superintended  the  slaying.  See  Note 
on  Lev.  1.  5,  But  in  the  present  in- 
stance it  is  not  unreasonable  to  suppose 
that  Aaron  performed  the  slaughter  in 
person. 

9.  The  sons  of  Aaron  hrought  the 
blood  unto  him.  Having  cauglu  the 
blood  in  basins,  as  it  run  from  the  vic- 
tim when  killed,  they  brought  it  to  him 
as  he  stood  waiting  at  the  altar.     The 


ceremonies  that  followed    have    been 
already  described. 

10.  He  burnt  upon  the  altar.  He  laid 
them  in  order  upon  the  altar,  that  they 
might  be  consumed,  not  with  ordinary 
fire,  but  with  that  which  was  ere  long 
to  come  forth  from  before  the  Lord  ;  for 
common  fire,  it  would  seem,  was  no 
longer  to  be  used  when  Aaron's  sacri- 
fice began,  as  it  had  been  all  along  be- 
fore. Still  it  is  possible  that  the  mira- 
culous fire  did  not  issue  forth  till  the 
holocaust  of  the  people  came  to  be 
be  offered,  v.  24. 

15.  He  brought  the  people's  offering 
Having  duly  presented  the  requisite 
offering  for  himself,  he  wa%  now  pre- 
pared to  officiate  in  behalf  of  the  people, 
which  he  did  according  to  the  mode 
prescribed,  Ex.  29.  39,  40.    Lev.  chs. 

1.  2.  and  7.,  on  which  see  Notes. 

^  Took  the  goat — and  offered  it  for  sin 
Heb.  ini^LDni  ye'hatteihu.  It  is  the 
same  term  with  that  which  occurs  Lev. 
S.  15,  and  which  is  both  here  and  there 
rendered  by  the  Gr.  KaQcwiatv,  cleansed. 
The  Heb.  word  ^"CTl  'hotd,  in  its  radical 
or  Kal  form,  signifies  to  sin  ;  while  in 
the  Piel  form  it  is  used  to  signify  jjuj-g-- 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  IX. 


81 


16  And  he  brought  the  burnt- 
offering,  and  offered  it  '  according 
to  the  manner. 

17  And  he  brouglit  u  the  meat- 
offering, and  took  an  handful  there- 
of, and  burnt  it  upon  the  altar, 
x  beside  the  burnt-sacrifice  of  the 
morning. 

IS  He  slew  also  the  bullock  and 
the  ram  for  ya  sacrifice  of  peace- 
offerings,  which  icas  for  the  people: 
and  Aaron's  sons  presented  unto 
him  the  blood,  which  besprinkled 
upon  the  altar  round  about, 

19  And  the  fat  of  the  bullock,  and 

t  ch.  1.  3,  10.  u  ver.  4.  ch.  2.  1,  2.  x  Ex. 
29.  38.     y  ch.  3.  1,  &c. 

ing  auay  sin  by  sacrifice.  (See  Note 
on  Lev.  6.20.)  Tlius  Gen.31.  39, '  That 
which  was  lorn  of  beasts,  I  bare  the 
loss  of  it  (nrtDS*  a'hatt'tnah,  I  expiated, 
atoned,  made  satisfaction  for  it).'  Ps. 
51.  7, '  Purge  me  ("^Z^'^Tiri  te'haite'tni) 
with  hyssop,  and  I  shall  be  clean.' 
Lev.  8.  15,  •  And  Moses  purified  (^^t2^"' 
ye'hatti)  the  altar  and  sanctified  it.' 

16.  According  to  the  manner.  Heb. 
i25'i;/2S  kammishpiit,  according  to  the 
judgment  or  ordinance.  See  Note  on 
Lev.  5.  10.  Gr.  us  KaBnKci,  as  it  teas  fit. 
Tlie  ordinance  alluded  to  is  found  in  the 
general  law  of  the  first  chapter. 

17.  Beside  the  burnt  sacrifice  of  the 
mai-ning.  That  is,  in  addition  to  the 
daily  sacrifice  of  the  lamb,  which  was 
not  to  be  superseded  by  the  extra  offer- 
ings of  this  or  any  other  occasion. 

19.  That  which  covereth,  <§-c.  '  The 
fat  that  covereth  the  inwards  '  is  the  fat 
thin  membrane  extended  over  the  intes- 
lines,  and  att.iched  to  the  concave  part 
of  the  liver,  called  the  omentum,  or  caul. 
And  by  '  the  caul  above  the  liver,'  is 
commonly  understood,  after  the  Septua- 
gint,  the  great  lobe  of  the  liver  (major 
lobus  hepatis),  which,  although  part  of 
the  liver  itself,  ma/ very  properly  be 
rendered  ' the  lobe  over '  or  'by  the 
liver.'  As  to  the  caul,  it  was  a  com- 
mon offering  in   the  sacrifices  of  the 


of  the  ram,  the  rump,  and  that 
which  covereth  the  inwards,  and 
the  kidneys,  and  the  caul  above  the 
liver : 

20  And  they  put  the  fat  upon  the 
breasts,  ^and  he  burnt  the  fat  upon 
the  altar: 

21  And  the  breasts  and  the  right 
shoulder  Aaron  waved  ^for  a 
wave-offering  before  the  Loud;  as 
Moses  commanded. 

22  And  Aaron  lifted  up  his  hand 
toward  the  people,  band  blessed 
them  ;  and  came  down  from  offer- 

z  ch.  3.  5.  16.  a  Exod.  29.  24,  26.  ch.  7. 
30,  31,  32,  33,  .34.  b  Numb.  6.  23.  Deut. 
21.  5.     Luke  24.  50. 


ancient  heathen  ;  and  Slrabo  remarks, 
that  the  Persians,  in  their  sacrifices, 
offered  nothing  else  upon  the  altar. 
Calmet,  who  gives  these  instances  in  his 
'  Commentaire  Litttjral,'  cites  Athenoeus 
in  evidence  that  the  ancients  ate  ihe 
liver  covered  with,  or  enfolded  in,  the 
caul ;  and  he  thinks  it  probable  that  the 
liver  of  the  victim  was,  in  the  same 
manner,  wrapped  up  in  the  caul  before 
it  was  laid  upon  the  altar  ;  and  that  this 
is  what  Moses  means  by  the  '  caul 
above'  or  upon  the  liver. 

22.  Aaron  lifted  up  his  hand  toward 
the  people,  and  blessed  them.  By  im- 
ploring, and  then  pronouncing  the 
divine  blessing  upon  them.  The  so- 
lemnity of  blessing  the  people  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  appertained  especially 
to  the  priestly  office  ;  Deut.  10.  8, '  The 
Lord  separated  the  tribe  of  Levi  to 
bear  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  the  Lord, 
to  stand  before  the  Lord  to  minister 
unto  him,  and  to  bless  in  his  name  unto 
this  day.'  The  form  of  the  benediction 
is  given  Num.  6.  23,  27.  Considered  as 
a  type,  this  was  accomplished  by  our 
great  high-priest,  Christ  Jesus,  when, 
having  fini^^hed  his  ministry  on  earth, 
'  he  lifted  up  his  hands  and  blessed'  his 
disciples,  at  his  ascension  into  heaven, 

Luke    24.    50. IT  And    came    down. 

That  is,  from   the  bank  or  elevation 


82 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


ing  of  the  sin-offering,  and  the 
burnt-offering,  and  peace-offerings. 
23  And  Mioses  and  Aaron  went 
into  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation, and  came  out,  and  blessed 
the  people:  c  and  the  glory  of  the 
LoiiD  appeared  unto  all  the  people. 

c  ver.  6.     Numb.   14.    10,   and  16.    19,  42. 

U'hich  formed  the  ascent  to  the  altar,  as 
steps  were  forbidden. 

23.  Moses  and  Aaron  went  into  the 
tabernacle.  Aaron,  the  priest,  went  in 
according  to  the  law,  Ex.  30.  7,  9,  to 
burn  incense  on  the  golden  altar;  Moses 
went  in  with  Aaron,  in  all  likelihood  to 
instruct  him  in  the  manner  of  the  ser- 
vice that  was  to  be  performed  there, 
such  as  burning  the  incense,  lighting 
the  lamps,  setting  in  order  the  shew- 
hread,  &c.,  that  he  might  instruct  his 

sons  in  it. IF  The  glory  of  the  Lord 

appeared  unto  all  the  people.  That  is, 
the  visible  sign  of  God's  glorious  pre- 
sence, indicated  either  by  the  fire  men- 
tioned in  the  next  verse,  or  by  the  more 
luminous  appearance  of  the  cloudy  pil- 
lar, as  in  Ex.  16.  10,  and  40.  34,  or  by 
both.  It  was  a  token  of  God's  gracious 
acceptance  of  them  and  of  their  ser- 
vices, as  in  1  Kings  S.  10— 12.  The 
miraculous  fire  now  sent  forth  from  the 
divine  presence,  was,  according  to  the 
Hebrews,  kept  alive  upon  the  altar  till 
the  time  of  Solomon.  Under  the  second 
temple,  the  Jews  confess  that  the  sacred 
fire  was  wanting. 

24.  They  shouted,  ^-c.  From  the 
combined  effect  of  wonder  and  joy  ;  de- 
voutly and  ardently  giving  thanks  to 
God  for  this  mark  of  his  special  favor. 
Thus  on  a  similar  occasion,  2  Chron. 
27.  3,  *  When  all  the  sons  of  Israel  saw 
how  the  fire  came  down,  and  the  glory 
of  the  Lord  shone  upon  the  house,  they 
bowed  themselves  with  their  faces  to 
the  ground,  upon  the  pavement,  and 
worshipped  and  praised  tlie  Lord,  say- 
ing. For  he  is  good,  for  his  mercy  en- 
4urelh  for  ever.'    Had  they  not  been 


24  And  d  there  came  a  fire  out 
from  before  tlie  Lord,  and  consum- 
ed upon  the  altar  the  burnt-offer- 
ing and  the  fat  :  uJnch  when  ali 
the  people  saw,  e  ibey  shouted, 
and  lell  on  their  faces. 

d  Gen.  4.  4.  Judg.  6.  21.  1  Kings  18.  33. 
■2  Chron.  7.  1.  Ps.  -20.  3.  c  i  Kings  13.  3D. 
2  Chron  7,  3.     Ezra  3.  11. 


previously  taught  to  expect  some  extra- 
ordinary  expressions  of  tlie  divine  re- 
gard, they  would  probably  have  been 
terrified  as  Gideon  and  Manoah  were  ; 
but  being  prepared,  they  were  filled 
with  triumph  and  exullaiion,  and  rent 
the  air  with  their  shouts. 


CHAPTER  X. 

We  are  called,  in  the  present  chapter, 
to  pnss  by  a  melancholy  transition  from 
a  scene  of  high  festive,  but  hoi)-,  re- 
joicing, to  a  scene  of  awful  judgment 
uiid  heart-rending  sorrow.  The  taber- 
nacio  had  been  finished  j  Aaron  and  his 
four  sons,  Nadab  and  Abihu,  Eleazar 
and  Illiamar,  had  been  consecrated  to 
the  priesthood  ;  the  victims  had  been 
slain  ;  Moses  and  Aaron  had  solemnly 
blessed  the  congregation;  the  divine 
requirements  had  all  been  complied 
with  ;  and  in  attestation  of  God's  ac- 
ceptance of  their  services,  his  glory  had 
appeared  to  all  the  peojde,  and  the  fire 
of  heaven  had  descended  upon  the  ahar 
and  kindled  a  flame  never  to  be  quench- 
ed. In  the  midst  of  these  hallowed 
solemnities,  when  all  the  assembled 
host  were  bowing  before  the  Lord,  anil 
giving  vent  to  expressions  of  profound 
but  chastened  joy,  an  act  of  rasli,  pre- 
sumptuous, and  sacrilegious  daring  on 
the  part  of  Nadab  and  Abihu,  in  a  mo- 
ment turns  the  scene  of  worship  into 
one  of  woe,  and  spreads  sackcloth  over 
the  tabernacle  !  Scarcely  liad  the  celes- 
tial fire  come  down  in  mercy  to  con\ume 
the  sacrifice,  when  again  it  descends  in 
wrath  to  consume  the  sacrificers  !  This 
tragical  event  is  thus  briefly  but  dis. 
linctly    recorded    by    Moses,    whosa 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  X. 


83 


characteristic  it  is  neither  to  extenuate  ' 
nor  set  down  aught  in  malice  ;  '  And  ; 
Nadab  and  Abihu,  the  sons  of  Aaron,  ! 
look  either  of  them  iiis  censer,  and  j)ut 
fire  therein,  and  put  incense  thereon, I 
and  offered  strange  fire  before  the  Lord, 
which  he  commanded  them  not.  And 
there  went  out  fire  from  the  Lord,  and 
devoured  them,  and  they  <lied  before 
the  Lord.'  The  words  are  few,  but  of 
fr'arfuUy  solemn  import,  and  the  whole  I 
narrative  presents  a  large  theme  of 
•  alulary  practical  remark  and  admoni- 
iiun.  The  principal  reflections  sug- 
gested by  the  mournful  occurrence  will 
\,e  adduced  in  the  course  of  our  com- 
ments on  the  several  verses  ;  but  we 
may  properly  pause,  at  the  outset,  to 
consider  somewhat  particularly  the 
nature,  circumstances,  and  grounds  of 
the  offence  wiiich  drew  down  such  a 
terrible  infliction  of  wrath  upon  the 
perpetrators.  Whatever  may  be  deter- 
mined as  to  the  precise  nature  of  the 
crime,  it  is  clear  that  it  was  aggravated  | 
by  the  character  of  those  by  whom  it  I 
was  committed.  These  w^re  the  sons, 
the  tw'o  eldest  sons,  of  Aaron  the  high 
Driest.  They  were,  from  their  relation 
lo  Aaron,  men  of  name  and  note  in  Is- 
rael ^  and  they  had  formerly  been  hon- 
nred  with  the  high  distinction  of 
•Accompanying  Moses  and  their  father 
lo  the  summit  of  the  hallowed  mount, 
where  tliey  were  favored  with  a  vision 
of  God,  such  as  had  never  before  been 
accorded  to  mortal  eyes  ;  Ex.  24.  9. 
'  Then  went  up  Moses  and  Aaron,  Na- 
dab  and  Abihu,  and  seventy  of  the  elders 
of  Israel ;  and  they  saw  the  God  of 
Israel :  and  there^'as  under  his  feet  as 
it  were  a  paved  work  of  a  sapphire-stone, 
and  as  it  were  the  body  oi  heaven  in  his 
clearness.'  None  of  the  seventy  elders 
are  named  ;  but  Moses  and  Aaron,  Na- 
dab  and  Abihu,  from  their  pre-eminence 
in  the  congregation,  are  expressly 
designated.  Again,  they  had  just  been 
consecrated,  along  with  their  father,  to 
the  dignity  of  the  priestly  office.  They 
had  just  been  assisting  him  and  Moses 


in  the  sacred  offerings.  They  had  been 
prominent  actors  in  the  solemnities  of 
an  occasion  which  should  above  all 
others  have  filled  their  souls  with  rev- 
erence  and  holy  awe.  However  it  might 
have  been  with  others  in  the  congrega- 
tion,  we  can  scarcely  imagine  tisat  any 
but  the  devoute&l  sentiments  should 
have  penetrated  their  spirits  in  view  of 
the  transactions  in  which  they  were 
engaged.  Yet  in  the  midst  of  it  all 
they  sinned  a  sin,  the  enormity  of  which 
is  most  effectually  proclaimed  by  the 
tremendous  punishment  which  it  imme- 
diately drew  after  it.  They  were  struck 
dead  with  their  censers  in  their  hands, 
without  a  moment's  warning  •  What  a 
fearful  exhibition  of  the  truth,  that 
God's  jealousy  burns  fiercest  about  his 
altar .' 

But  the  question  occurs  as  to  the  real 
nature  of  the  ofience  ior  which  they 
perished.  In  what  did  it  consist? — a 
point  on  which  it  is  not  easy  to  give  a 
perfectly  satisfactory  decision.  The 
text  simply  informs  us  that  they  '  offer- 
ed strange  fire  before  the  Lord,  which 
he  commanded  them  not.'  What  this 
was  we  shall  shortly  endeavor  to  show ; 
but  we  may  here  remark,  that  in  all 
probability  their  crime  was  of  a  com- 
plicated nature.  From  a  careful  in- 
spection of  the  context,  it  would  appear, 
that  their  sin  is  not  to  be  resolved  into 
any  one  form  of  disobedience,  but  tliat 
it  involved  a  number.  And  in  the  first 
place,  it  would  seem  that  there  was 
ground  for  the  belief  suggested  by  most 
commentators,  that  they  had  indulged 
too  freely  in  wine.  This  seems  to  be 
reasonably  inferred  from  the  solemn 
prohibition,  v.  9,  10,  *  Do  not  drink  wine 
nor  strong  drink,  thou,  nor  thy  sons 
with  thee,  when  ye  go  into  the  taberna- 
cle  of  the  congregation,  lest  ye  die:  it 
shall  1  e  a  statute  for  ever  throughout 
your  generations  :  And  that  ye  may  put 
difference  between  holy  and  unholy,  and 
between  unclean  and  clean.'  The  con- 
jecture therefore  is  very  plausible,  that 
tliey  had  rendered  themselves  incapably 


84 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


cf  the  due  discharge  of  their  duty  by  , 
intemperance  ;  that  they  had  partaken  j 
of  Ihe  drink-offerings  to  a  criminal  ex-  : 
cess  ;  and  thus  become  incapacitated  to  j 
put  a  difference  between  holy  and  un-  i 
holy,  and  between  clean  and  unclean,  i 
If  there  be  truth  in  this  supposition,  ■ 
what  a  commentary  does  it  afford  on  , 
tlie  pernicious  effects  of  stimulating  i 
liquors,  especially  when  used  by  the  I 
ministers  of  the  altar  !  By  clouding  j 
th.e  moral  perceptions,  and  inflaming  ! 
the  passions,  they  render  their  willing  ! 
subject  capable  of  any  sacrilege  or  im- 
piety, and  thus  expose  him  to  the  aveng- 
ing stroke  of  an  outraged  Divinity  ! 

At  the  same  time,  we  should  hardly 
infer  from  the  tenor  of  the  sacred  story, 
that  this,  although  an  element,  was  the 
essence  of  their  crime.  There  is  some 
reason  to  suppose  that,  apart  from  the 
quality  of  the  fire  which  they  brought, 
there  was  a  rash  intrusion,  and  a  reck- 
less irregularity  in  their  going  forward 
to  officiate  at  the  time,  and  in  the  man- 
ner they  did.  The  whole  transaction, 
as  recorded,  has  an  air  of  abruptness 
and  precipitancy,  as  if  they  rushed  upon 
the  service  without  waiting  for  instruc- 
tions, either  from  Moses  or  Aaron  ;  and 
as  if  they  were  encroaching  upon  the 
functions  of  the  high-priest.  If  by  the 
phrase  'oflered  before  the  Lord,'  be 
meant,  as  some  suppose,  that  they  ad- 
vanced within  the  most  Holy  Place,  and 
there  presumed  to  offer  incense  before 
the  Shekinah,  this  certainly  was  a  bold 
invasion  of  Aaron's  prerogative,  and 
one  that  would  of  course  expose  them 
to  he  at  once  cut  off  for  their  hardihood. 
This  idea  receives  some  countenance 
from  Lev.  16.  1,  2,  whore  we  arc  told 
that '  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses  after 
the  death  of  the  two  sons  of  Aaron, 
when  they  offered  before  the  Lord,  and 
died  :  and  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
Speak  unto  Aaron  thy  brother,  that  he 
come  not  at  all  times  into  the  holy 
place  w  ithin  the  vail,  before  the  mercy- 
seat,  which  is  upon  the  ark  ;  that  he 
die  not :  for  I  will  appear  in  the  cloud 


upon  the  mercy-seat.'  Whether  this  be 
the  correct  inference  or  not,  we  hav3  no 
evidence  from  any  other  part  of  the 
ritual  that  more  than  one  priest  was  to 
officiate  in  burning  incense  at  the  same 
time,  and  here  they  are  represented  as 
entering  together  upon  a  service  to 
which  it  does  not  appear  that  either  of 
them  was  now  called. 

But  laying  aside  every  thing  that  is 
uncertain  in  the  affair,  we  find  a  definite 
and  aggravated  offence  laid  to  their 
charge.  They  sinned  by  offering  strange 
fire  before  the  Lord.  Instead  of  filling 
their  censers  with  coals  from  the  altar, 
where  a  supernatural  fire  had  been 
kindled  from  heaven,  and  which  was 
always  to  be  used  in  burning  incense, 
they  contemptuously  disregarded  this 
ordinance,  and  filled  their  vessels  with 
common  fire.  This  was  the  head  and 
front  of  their  offending,  whatever  minor 
accessaries  of  guilt  may  have  accom- 
panied it. 

But  where,  it  is  said,  is  this  act  ex- 
pressly forbidden?  Is  it  any  where 
ordered,  in  so  many  words,  that  only 
one  kind  of  fire  should  be  employed  in 
the  services  of  the  sanctuary?  And  if 
there  was  no  express  precept  violated, 
wherein  consisted  the  essential  crim- 
inality of  their  conduct?  In  reply  to 
this,  we  answer  (L)  That  in  the  phrase 
'  which  he  commanded  not,'  we  recog- 
nize, according  to  the  idiom  of  the 
sacred  writers,  a  clear  intimation  that 
the  thing  in  question  had  been  expressly 
forbidden.  This  is  the  true  force  of 
the  expression,  as  we  shall  evince  in 
our  note  on  the  passage.  (2.)  In  Ex. 
30.  9,  it  is  command^  that  no  '  strange 
incense  '  should  be  presented,  and  the 
implication  would  be  inevitable,  from 
the  nature  of  the  case,  that  '  strange 
fire  '  was  equally  contrary  to  the  divine 
will.  But  not  only  so.  From  Lev.  16. 
12, 13,  we  learn  that  on  the  day  of  atone- 
ment,  the  priest  was  to  '  lake  a  censer 
full  of  burning  coals  of  fire  from  off  the 
altar  before  the  Lord,  and  his  hands  full 
of   sweet    incense   beaten    small,  and 


13.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  X. 


85 


CHAPTER  X. 
ND   aNadab   and    Abihu,  the 
-  sons  of  Aaron,  b  took  either  of 


a  ch.  15.  1,  and  22.  9. 
•2fi.  01.  1  Chroii.  24.  2. 
16.  IS. 


Numb.  3.  3,  4,  and 
'■'  ch.  16.  12.    Num. 


bring  it  within  the  vail  :  And  he  shall 
[Hit  the  incense  upon  the  fire  before  the 
Lord,  that  the  cloud  of  the  incense  may 
cover  the  mercy-seat  that  is  upon  the 
testimony,  tliat  he  die  not.'  The  order 
contained  in  this  passage  was  indeed 
£(iven  subsequent  to  the  event  we  are 
now  considering,  but  the  presumption 
obviously  is,  that  this  was  the  standing 
usage  which  had  been  ordained  from 
the  first  institution  of  the  legal  rites, 
and  as  to  which  it  is  not  conceivable 
that  Aaron's  sons  should  have  been 
ignorant.  And  as  the  fire  miraculously 
kindled  on  the  altar  was  to  be  kept  per- 
petually alive,  what  other  inference 
could  have  been  drawn,  than  that  from 
this  source  was  all  the  fire  to  be  de'rived 
which  was  employed  in  the  sacred  rites  ? 
The  fact  that  we  do  not  meet  with  any 
such  injunction  in  express  terms,  does 
not  at  all  abate  the  force  of  the  proba- 
bility that  they  were  perfectly  aware 
that  such  was  the  will  of  God  in  regard 
to  this  matter. 

The  penalty  which  was  inflicted  upon 
the  transgressors  was  indeed  severe. 
But  the  case  called  for  severity.  The 
rank  and  station  of  the  offenders  was  a 
high  aggravation  of  their  crime.  It 
was  their  duty  to  set. an  example  of 
scrupulous  regard  to  the  known  will  of 
God.  They  had  been  admitted  to  more 
intimate  communion  with  God  than 
others,  and  had  seen  more  of  the  terrors 
of  his  power,  more  of  the  wonders  of 
his  grace.  Moreover,  the  Levitical  in- 
stitute had  been  just  established,  and 
was  now  for  the  first  time  going  into 
operation.  It  behoved,  therefore,  that 
every  thing  should  be  done  in  exact  con- 
formity to  the  divine  prescription.  The 
sanctity  of  the  whole  system  would  be 
gone  at  once,  if  the  ministry  of  it  might 
S 


them  his  censer,  and  put  fire  there- 
in, and  put  incense  thereon,  and 
offered  c  strange  fire  before  the 
Lord,  which  he  commanded  them 
not. 

c  Exod.  30.  9. 

with  impunity  presume,  in  its  setting 
out,  to  dispense  with  any  of  its  fixed 
regulations.  As,  then,  the  deed  was 
daring  and  high-handed  in  the  extreme, 
so  the  expiation  was  proportionably 
fearful ;  and  the  whole  transaction  most 
forcibly  impresses  upon  us  the  apposite 
admonition  of  the  apostle,  '  Let  us  have 
grace  whereby  we  may  serve  God  ac- 
ceptably, with  reverence  and  godly 
fear  ;  for  our  God  is  a  consuming  fire.' 

The  Sin  and  Death  of  Nadab  and 
Abihu. 
1.  Took  either  of  them  his  censer. 
Or,  '  fire-pan  ;'  a  vessel  in  which  coals 
of  fire  were  put,  to  be  sprinkled  over 
with  i'rankincense,  in  order  to  create  an 
agreeable  odor  in  the  sanctuary.  The 
event  here  mentioned  probably  occurred 
at  the  time  of  the  evening  sacrifice, 
when  the  lamps  were  lighted,  and  in- 
cense burned,  unless,  as  some  suppose, 
one  part  of  their  oflfence  was  doing  that 
at  another  lime  of  day  which  was  ap- 
pointed to  be  done  in  the  morning  or 

evening. IT    Offered    strange    fire. 

That  is,  other  fire  than  that  which  the 
Lord  had  commanded.  The  Lord  had 
sent  a  supernatural  fire  to  consume  the 
first  victim's  offered  to  him.  This  was 
to  be  kept  perpetually  alive,  and  from 
it  only  were  the  coals  to  be  taken  for 
the  burning  of  incense.  Such,  at  least, 
might  have  been  gathered  to  be  the  will 
of  God,  although  the  injunction,  in  so 
many  words,  is  not  expressly  recorded 
in  any  part  of  the  preceding  narrative. 
It  is  probable,  however,  that  an  explicit 
command  to  this  effect  had  been  pre- 
viously given  by  Moses,  though  not 
mentioned.  The  command  was  after- 
wards expressly  recorded,  Lev.  16.  12, 
in  allusion  to  which  it  is  said.  Rev.  %.5, 


LEVITICUS. 


\B.  C.  a490. 


2  And  there  °  went  out  fire  from  i  This  is  it  that  the  Lord  spake, 
the  LoKP,  and  devoured  them,  and  |  saying,  I  will  be  sanciified  in  ihem 
they  died  bel'ore  the  Lord.  i  e  that  come  nigh  me,  and  before  all 

3  Then  Moses  said  unto  Aaron,  |     ,  j,^^j  19.  22,  and -29. 43.  d..  21.6, 17,21. 

d  ch  9.  24.     Numb.  IG.  35.     2Sam.  6.7.       I  Isai.  52.  11.     Ezek.  20.  41,  and  42.  13. 


'  The  angel  look  the  censer  and  filled  it  j 

with  fire  of  the  altar. ^ IT  Whick  he 

commanded  them  not.  This,  by  <i  figure 
of  speech  called  meiosis,  is  probably 
equivalent  lo  saying,  *  which  llie  Lord 
had  pointedly  forbidden.'  The  follow- 
ing  are  instances  of  a  similar  usage: 
Ps.  78.  50.  '  He  spared  not  their  soul 
from  death  ;'  i.  e.  he  destroyed  them 
with  desolating  judgaients.  Prov.  12.  3. 
'  A  man  shall  not  be  established  by 
wickedness  ;'  i.  e.  he  shall  be  over- 
thrown. Prov.  17.  21.  *  The  father  of 
a  fool  hath  no  joy  ;'  i.  e.  hath  grief  and 
sorrow.  In  ihe^e  cases  under  a  nega- 
tive form  of  expression,  the  contrary 
affirmative  is  emphatically  implied. 

2.  There  icent  out  fire  from  before 
the  Lord.  That  is,  Irom  the  Shekinah, 
the  symbol  of  the  divine  presence,  be- 
fore which  tlicy  had  presumed  to  ofFer 
llie  strange  fire  upon  the  altar  of  in- 
cense.    This  stood  in  front  of  the  most 

holy  place,  just   without  the  vail. 

IT  And  devoured  them.  The  action  of 
the  fire  in  this  instance  was  peculiar,  as 
neither  their  bodies  nor  their  clothes 
were  consumed  by  it.  Targ.  Jon.  *  It 
burned  their  souls,  but  not  their  bodies.' 
It  was  a  flash  of  preternatural  fire  Irom 
the  cloud  of  glory  that  rested  over  the 

mercy-seal. IT  Died  before  the  Lord. 

That  is,  before  the  vail  that  covered 
the  mercy-seat. 

3.  This  is  it  that  the  Lord  spake.  It 
does  not  appear  from  the  record  that 
these  precise  words  were  anywhere  pre- 
viously spoken,  although  some  suppose 
that  reference  is  had  to  Ex.  19.22,  '  Let 
the  priests  which  come  near  the  Lord 
sanctify  themselves,  lest  the  Lord  break 
forth  upon  them.'  Others  again  con- 
ceive that  the  words  alluded  to  are 
found,  Ex.  29.  43,  '  And  there  will  I 
meet  with  the  children  of  Israel,  and 


the  tabernacle  shall  be  sanctified  by  my 
glory.'  The  words  might  have  been 
previously  spoken,  but  not  written. 
Perhajis,  however,  all  that  is  intended 
is,  that  this  was  the  spirit  and  purport 
of  what  God  had  said,  not  on  any  par- 
ticular occasion,  but  in  the  general  leimr 

of  his  instructions  to   the  priests. 

IT  I  wilt  be  sanctified  in  them  that  come 
nigh  me.  Heb.  'JJIpfc^  "-"ipi-  bikrobai 
ekkadosh.  in  my  near  ones  will  I  be 
sanctified.  That  is,  ihose  who  approach 
near  to  God  in  the  duties  of  a  lioly  min- 
istration. Thus  the  Priests  and  Levites 
were  such  as  are  described  Ezek.42. 13, 
as  'approaching  unto  the  Lord.'  So 
a^so,  Ex.  19.  22,  '  Let  the  priests  also, 
uhich  come  near  to  the  Lord,  sanclify 
themselves;'  i.  e.  those  whose  office  it 
is  to  come  near  to  the  Lord.  So  iu 
1  Pet.  4.  17,  judgment  is  said  lo  begin 
'  at  the  house  of  God  ;'  and  in  Kzek.  9  6, 
'  at  the  sanctuary.'  God  is  said  in  the 
language  of  Scripture  to  be  '  sanctified' 
by  his  )ieople,  when  they  demean  them- 
selves holily  and  uprightly  before  him, 
duly  regarding  and  reverencing  every 
thing  by  which  lie  makes  himself 
known  ;  1  Pet.  3.  15.  '  Sanctify  the 
Lord  God  in  your  hearts,'  &c.  So  also 
he  is  'sanctified'  when  he  righieously 
punishes  those  who  transgress.  Ezek. 
27.  22,  '  Behold,  I  am  against  thee,  O 
Zidon,  and  I  will  be  glorified  in  the 
midst  of  thee  ;  and  they  shall  know 
that  I  am  the  Lord,  when  I  shall  have 
executed  judgments  in  her,  and  shall  be 
sanctified  in  her.'  So  also  Ezek.  38. 
16.23,  'I  shall  bring  thee  against  my 
land,  that  the  heathen  may  know  me 
when  I  shall  be  sanctified  in  thee,  0 
Gog,  before  their  eyes.  Tiien  will  I 
magnify  myself,  and  sanctify  myself; 
and  I  will  be  known  m  the  eyes  of 
many  nations.'      God  will    either    bo 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  X. 


87 


the   people   I    v/ill   be    f glorified. 
gAnd  Aaron  held  his  peace. 

4  And  iMoses  called  iVIishael  and 
Elz.iphan,  the  sons  of  h  Uzziel  the 
uncle  of  Aaron,  and  said  unto  ihem, 
Come  near,  i  carry  your  brethren 
from  before  the  sanctuary  out  of 
liie  camp. 

5  So  they  went  near,  and  carried 
them  in  theircoatsoutof  the  camp; 
as  Moses  had  said. 


6  And  Moses  said  unto  Aaron,  and 
unto  Eleazar  and  unto  Ithamar,  his 
sons,  k  Uncover  not  your  heads, 
neither  rend  your  clotiies ;  lest  ye 
die,  and  lest  i  wrath  come  upon  all 
the  people:  but  let  your  brethren, 
the  whole  house  of  Israel,  bewail 
the  burning  v/hich  the  Lokd  hath 
kindled. 

7  m  And  ye  shall  not  go  out  from 
the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 


f  Isai.  49.  3.  Ezek.  23.  22.  John  13.  31, 
32.  and  14  13.  2  Thess.  1.  10.  S  Ps.  39.  9. 
h  Exod.  6.  18,  22.  Numb  3.  19  30.  i  Luke 
7.  12.     Acts  5.  6,  9,  10,  and  8.  12. 


sanctified  by  all  his  creatures  in  a  way 
of  active  reverence,  obedience,  and 
praise,  or  upon  them  in  a  way  of  ven- 
geance and  wrath. IT  And  Aaron  held 

his  peace.  Heb.  dT*  yiddom,  was 
hushed,  silent,  quiescent.  The  original 
word  is  tliat  which  occurs  Jo.sh.  10.  13, 
in  reference  to  the  standing  still  of  llie 
sun  and  moon  at  the  command  of 
Joshua,  on  which  see  Note.  The  mean- 
ing is  that  he  yielded  in  quiet  submis- 
sion, without  a  murmur,  to  the  just 
judgment  of  heaven  in  bereaving  him 
of  his  sons.  So  the  Psalmist,  Ps.  34.  9. 
*  I  uas  dumb,  I  opened  not  my  mouth, 
becauf<e  thou  didst  it.' 

4.  Cai-ry  your  brethren  from  before, 
fyc.  Tlial  is,  your  kinsmen.  This  order 
was  given  to  the  cousins  of  Nadab  and 
Abihu,  rather  than  to  their  immediate 
brethren,  both  that  their  feelings  might 
be  consulted,  and  that  they  might  not 
be  called  off  from  their  ministrations  at 
the  altar.  Yet  as  these  sons  of  Uzziel 
were  merely  Leviles,  and  not  priests,  it 
would  have  been  unlawful  for  them  to 
enter  into  the  sanctuary  except  in  con- 
sequence of  a  special  command  of 
Moses. 

5.  Carried  them  in  their  coats  out  of 
the  camp.  That  is,  in  the  tunics  or 
linen  garments  in  wliich  lliey  minister- 
ed, and  in  wliich  they  were  doubtless 
buried,  as  they  would  be  considered  as 
henceforth  unfit  for  any  kind  of  sacred 


k  Exod.   33    5.     ch.  13.  45,   and  21.   1.   10. 
Numb   6.  6,  7.    Deut.  33.  9.     Ezek.  24   16,  17. 

1  Numb    16.  22.  46.     Josh.  7.  1,  and  22.  18.  20. 

2  Sam.  24.  1.     m  ch.  21.  12. 


service,  whereas  in  ordinary  cases  the 
cast-off  dresses  of  liie  priests  were  con- 
verted into  wick  for  the  lamps  of  the 
sanctuary. 

6.  Uncover  not  your  heads.  Heb. 
lyiCn  ^i^  al  tiphrdu.  Gr.  ovk  a-o<i6a. 
pcjjtre,  put  not  off  the  mitres.  The 
original  word  for  uncover,  which  pri- 
marily signifies  to  make  free,  and  which 
is  more  I'ully  explained  in  the  Note  on 
Jud.  5.  2,  would  seem  also  to  imply  a 
prohibition  against  letting  the  hair  be- 
come disarrayed  or  dishevelled,  as  was 
customary  in  bewailing  the- dead.  The 
meaning  we  suppose  to  be,  '  Let  none 
of  the  usual  signs  of  grief  or  mourning 
be  seen  upon  you  ;'  for  the  reason,  pro- 
bably, that  the  crime  of  their  brethren 
was  so  highly  provoking  to  God,  and  so 
fully  merited  the  punishment  which  he 
had  inflicted,  that  their  mourning  might 
be  considered  as  a  reflection  u})on  the 
divine  justice  towards  the  offenders. 
The  rending  of  the  clothes  was  another 
sign  of  sorrow,  as  appears  from  Lev. 

13.  45,  and  21.  10 ;  2  Sam.  13.  21. 

IT  Let  your  brethren,  fyc.  While  Aaron 
and  his  sons,  for  official  reasons,  were 
forbidden  to  assume  the  badges  of 
mourning,  the  congregation  at  large 
were  permitted  and  commanded  to  do 
it.  They  must  lament  not  only  the 
loss  of  their  priests,  but  especially  the 
displeasure  of  God  which  had  occa 
sioaed  it. 


88 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


congregation,  lest  ye  die  :  nfor  the 
anointing  oil  of  the  Lord  is  upon 
you.  And  they  did  according  to 
the  word  of  Moses. 
8  %  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Aaron,  saying, 

n  Exod.  2S.  41.     ch.  8.  30. 


.7.  The  anointing  oil  of  the  Lord  is 
upon  you.  That  is,  ye  are  devoted  by 
a  solemn  unction  to  the  service  of  God, 
which  is  not  to  be  omitted  out  of  respect 
to  any  earthly  relation  ;  whereas,  should 
you  leave  your  official  station  before  its 
duties  are  fully  performed,  it  would  be 
no  other  than  showing  greater  aifeclion 
and  respect  to  a  dead  friend  than  to  the 
living  God.  The  injunction  contained 
in  these  two  verses  seems  to  have  be- 
come a  standing  law  for  the  priests  ever 
after.  This  is  evident  from  Lev.  21. 
10,  12,  '  And  he  that  is  high  priest 
among  his  brethren,  upon  whose  head 
the  anointing  oil  was  poured,  and  that 
is  consecrated  to  put  on  the  garments, 
shall  not  uncover  his  head,  nor  rend  his 
clothes.  Neither  shall  he  go  out  of  the 
sanctuary,  nor  profane  the  sanctuary  of 
his  God  ;  for  the  crown  of  the  anointing 
oil  of  his  God  is  upon  him.' 

8.  And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Aaron. 
Hitherto,  the  Lord  on  all  such  occasions 
had  spoken  to  Moses ;  but  now  seeing 
that  Aaron  had  been  very  observant  of 
every  thing  commanded  him,  and  per- 
haps with  a  design  to  afford  him  some 
consolation  under  his  heavy  affliction, 
he  does  him  the  honor  to  speak  imme- 
diately to  him,  especially  as  the  pre- 
cept uttered  had  primary  respect  to  the 
priests,  of  whom  Aaron  was  head. 

9.  Do  not  drink  wine.  It  is  the  gen- 
eral  opinion  of  the  Jewish  commenta- 
tors, and  not  improbable  in  itself,  thai 
Nadab  and  Abihu  had  drank  wine  to 
excess  on  the  occasion  which  resulted 
in  ll^eir  death,  and  that  the  present  pro- 
hibition was  grounded  upon  the  circum- 
stance of  their  attempting  to  celebrate 
the  divine  service  in  a  slate  of  inebria- 


9  oPo  not  drink  wine  nor  strong 
drink,  thou,  nor  thy  sons  with  thee, 
when  ye  go  into  the  tabernacle  of 
the  congregation,  lest  ye  die :  it 
shall  be  a  statute  for  ever  through- 
out your  generations: 

o  Ezek.  44.  21.  Luke  1.  15.  1  Tim.  3.  3. 
Tit.  1.  7. 


lion.  The  spirit  of  the  precept  requires 
of  Gospel  ministers  thai  they  be  ^  sober, 
not  given  to  wine,'  1  Tim.  3.  2.  3.  *  Lest 
they  drink  and  forget  the  law,  and  per- 
vert judgment,'  Prov.  31.5;  lest  they 
'  err  through  wine,  and  through  strong 
drink  are  oul  of  the  way,'  Is.  28.  7.  By 
its  being  forbidden  to  be  used,  however, 
on  a  particular  occasion,  it  is  implied 
that  at  other  times  it  was  not  prohibited 
to  them,  as  it  was  not  expected  that 
every  priest  should  be  a  Nazarite.  So 
under  the  Gospel,  1  Tim.  5.  23,  '  Drink 
no  longer  water,  but  use  a  little  wine 
for  thy  stomach's  sake,  and  thine  often 
infirmities;'  where,  however,  it  will  be 
noted  that  the  precept  is  specially 
guarded,  both  in  respect  to  the  quantity 

and    the     occasion. IT    Nor   strong 

drink.  Heb.  "iSD  shikar,  from  ^l-D 
shdkar,  to  inebriate,  signifying  any 
kind  of  intoxicating  drink,  whether 
made  of  corn,  apples,  honey,  dales,  or 
olherfi-uits.  One  of  the  four  prohibited 
drinks  among  the  Mohammedans  in 
India  is  called  '  Sakar,'  which  signifies 
intoxicating  drink  in  general,  but  espe- 
cially date  wine.  The  ancient  Egyp- 
tians, as  we  learn  from  Herodotus, 
B.  II.  c.  77,  made  use  of  a  liquor  fer- 
mented from  barley.  Diod.  Siculus, 
Lib.  I.  de  Osir.  observes  that  '  where 
any  region  did  not  admit  the  growth  of 
the  vine,  a  drink  was  prepared  from 
barley,  not  much  inferior  in  flavor  and 
efficacy  to  wine.'  From  the  original 
word,  '  Sheker,'  preserved  in  the  Gr. 
and  Lai.  in  the  form  of  *  Sikera,'  and 
'  Sicera,'  is  probably  derived  the  English 
*  cider,'  a  term  applied  exclusively  to 
the  fermented  juice  of  apples,  and  so 
also  probably  the  word  *  sugar,'  from 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  X. 


10  And  that  j'e  may  p  put  differ- 
ence between  holy  and  unholy^and 
between  unclean  and  clean ; 

11  qAnd  that  ye  may  teach  the 
children  of  Israel  all  the  statutes 
which  the  Lord  hath  spoken  unto 
rhem  by  the  hand  of  Moses. 

12  ^  And  Moses  spake  unto 
Aaron,  and  unto  Eleazar,  and  unto 
Ithamar,  his  sons  that  were  left, 
Take  r  the  meat-offering  that  re- 
rnaineth  of  the  offerings  of  the 
LoKD  made  by  fire,  and  eat  it  with- 
out leaven  beside  the  altar:  for  sit 
IS  most  holy  : 

13  And  ye  shall  eat  it  in  the  holy 
place,  because  it  is  thy  due,  and 
thy  sons'  due,  of  the  sacrifices  of 
the  Lord  made  by  fire:  for  tso  I 
am  commanded. 

P  ch.  11.  47,  and  20.  25.  Jer.  15.  19.  Ezek. 
2:2.  26,  and  44.  23.  q  Deut.  24.  8.  Neh.  8. 
2,  S,  9,  13.  Jer.  18.  18.  Mai.  2.  7.  r  Exod. 
29.  2.  ch.  6.  IG.  Numb.  IS.  9,  10.  s  ch.  21. 
23.     t  ch.  2.  3,  and  6.  16. 


Fr.  *  Sucre.' ^  IVhen  ye  go  into  the 

tabernacle.     That  is,  into  the  court  of 

the  tabernacle. IT  Lest  ye  die.    Lest 

ye  do  that  which  shall  make  you  liable 
to  be  cut  off  by  the  vindictive  hand  of 
God,  as  in  the  melancholy  instance  be- 
fore you. 

10.  That  ye  may  put  difference,  SfC. 
That  is,  that  you  may  not  by  strong 
drink  so  cloud  and  darken  your  under- 
standings,  as  to  disqualify  yourselves 
from  distinguishing  in  your  ministra- 
tions between  that  which  is  sacred  and 
that  v.'hich  is  common  ;  or  from  •'  sepa- 
rating between  the  precious  and  the 
vile.'  As  the  word,  however,  in  the 
original  has  the  causative  form,  it  im- 
plies also  that  they  were  not  to  incapa- 
citate themselves  from  teaching  the 
people  to  make  the  due  discrimination. 
Thus  Ezek.  44.  23,  '  And  they  shall 
teach  njy  people  (the  difference,  or, 
how  to  distinguish)  between  the  holy 
and  the  profane,  and  cause  them  to  dis- 
cern between  the  unclean  and  the  clean.' 
With  neglecting  to  do  this,  the  priests 
8* 


14  And  u  the  wave-breast  and 
heave-shoulder  shall  ye  eat  in  a 
clean  place ;  thou,  and  thy  sons, 
and  thy  daughters  with  thee :  for 
they  be  thy  due,  and  thy  sons'  due, 
which  are  given  out  of  the  sacrifices 
of  peace-offerings  of  the  children 
of  Israel. 

15  ^The  heave-shoulder  and  the 
wave-breast  shall  they  bring,  with 
the  offerings  made  by  fire  of  the 
fat,  to  wave  it  for  a  wave-offering 
before  the  Lord;  and  it  shall  be 
thine,  and  thy  sons'  with  thee,  by 
a  statute  for  ever ;  as  the  Lord 
hath  commanded. 

16  H  And  Moses  diligently  sought 
y  the  goat  of  the  sin-offering,  and 
behold,  it  was  burnt:  and  he  was 
angry  with  Eleazar  and  Ithamar, 
the  sons  of  Aaron  ivhich  icere  left 
alive,  sayiog, 

"Exod.  29.  24,  26,  27.  ch.  7.  31,  34, 
Numb.  13.  11.  X  ch.  7.  29,  30,  34.  )'  ch.  9. 
3,  15. 


are  thus  charged,  Ezek.  22.  26,  '  Her 
priests  have  violated  my  law  and  have 
profaned  my  holy  things  ;  they  have 
put  no  difference  between  the  holy  and 
the  profane,  neither  have  they  showed 
difference  (taught  the  people  the  differ- 
ence) between  the  unclean  and  the 
clean.' 

12.  And  Moses  spake  unto  Aaron,  &c. 
The  directions  here  given  are  repeated 
from  those  that  were  formerly  deliver- 
ed, both  because  they  were  as  yet  but 
little  practised  in  the  sacred  ceremo- 
nies, and  therefore  needed  fuller  instruc- 
tion, and  because,  from  the  pressure  of 
their  grief,  they  might  possibly  forget 
or  neglect  some  part  of  the  divine  ordi- 
nances. 

16.  Moses  diligently  sought.  Inti- 
mating  that  he  suspected  some  devia- 
tion from  the  prescribed  rule.  That 
rule  was,  that  if  the  blood  of  the  sin- 
offering  of  the  people  was  brought  into 
the  holy  place,  as  was  that  of  the  sin- 
offering  ibr  the  priest,  then  the  flesh 
was  to  be  burned  without  the  camp  ; 


90 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


17  z  Wherefore  have  ye  not  eaten 
the  sin-ofiering  in  the  holy  place, 
seeing  it  zs  most  holy,  and  God 
liath  given  it  you  to  bear  the  in- 
iquity of  ihe  congregation,  to  make 
atonement  for  them  before  the 
Lord  ? 

'  18  Behold,  a  the  blood  of  it  was 
not  brought  in  within  the  holy 
place :  ye  should  indeed  have 
eaten  it  in  the  holy  place,  bas  I 
commanded. 

z  ch."6.  26,  29.     a  ch.  6.  30.     b  ch.  6.  2G. 

otlierwise  il  was  to  be  eaten  by  llie 
priest  in  tlie  holy  place.  Now  in  the 
present  instance,  the  blood  of  the  goal 
was  not  brought  into  the  holy  place, 
and  yet,  it  seems,  it  was  burned  without 
the  camp,  whereas  it  ought  to  have 
been  eaten. 

17.  God  hath  given  it  to  you  to  bear 
the  iniquity  of  the  congregation.  Gr. 
lua  a<pi^nr£,  that  ye  may  take  aivay. 
'l"he  phrase  '  to  bear  iniquity,'  often 
signifies  to  suffer  punishment  with- 
out forgiveness,  as  Ex.  28.  43,  Lev. 
20.  19 ;  but  in  the  present  instance  its 
meaning  is  the  reverse  of  this.  It  sig- 
nifies to  bear  au-ay,  to  procure  the  re- 
mission  of,  the  sins  of  the  people. 
Thtse  sins  were  in  some  sense  to  be 
transferred  to  the  priests  as  types  of 
Clirist,  who  'bore  our  sins  in  his  own 
btjdy  on  the  tree,'  and  of  whom  it  is 
said,  '  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God,  that 
talccth  away  the  sins  of  the  world.' 

19.  And  Aaron  said  unto  Moses,  &c. 
Moses  charged  the  fault  upon  Eleazar 
and  Iihamar,  but  it  is  probable  tliey 
acted  by  Aaron's  direction,  and  there- 
lore  he  apologized  for  it.  In  this  he 
tniikos  his  affliction  his  excuse.  He 
sujtposed  that  as  fasting  before  the 
Lord  required  a  joyful  frame  of  heart, 
his  being  at  this  time  overwhelmed 
wiili  horrow,  would  render  liim  unfit  to 
eat  of  l.l)e  holy  things  ;  that  he  could 
not  do  it  williout  polluting  them.  And 
from  the  following  passages  it  would 
appear    that    such  an    inl|)res!^i()n    was 


19  And  Aaron  said  unto  Moses, 
Behold,  c  this  day  have  they  offered 
tlieir  sin-offering,  and  their  hurnt- 
oifering  before  the  Lord;  and  such 
things  have  befillen  me  :  and  if  I 
had  eaten  the  sin-offering  to-day, 
d  should  it  have  been  accepted  in 
the  sight  of  the  Lord? 

20  And  when  Moses  heard  thaly 
he  was  content. 


ch.9.8,  12.    d  Jer.  6.  20,  and  14.  12-    Hos 
L     Mai.  1.  10,  13. 


not  without  foundation.  When  tlie  hal- 
lowed things  were  brought  according  to 
tlie  precept,  Deut.  26.  14,  the  offerei 
was  required  to  say,  '  I  have  not  eaten 
thereof  in  my  mourning.''  And  when 
God  would  refuse  the  sacrifice  ol'  the 
wicked,  he  says,  Hos.  9.  4,  '  They  shal 
be  unto  tiiem  as  the  bread  of  mourners , 
all  that  eat  thereof  sliall  be  jmlkited.' 
Moses  accordingly  admitted  the  force 
of  his  plea,  and  acquiesced  in  it  with- 

out  hesitation. "fT   Such  things  have 

befallen  me.  Chal.  *  Such  tribulations 
have  befallen  me.'  Jerus.  Targ.  '  Great 
sorrow  liath  this  day  befallen  me,  for 
tlial  my  two  sons  are  dead,  and  I  mourn 
for  them.' IT  Should  it  have  been  ac- 
cepted in  the  sight  of  the  Lord  ?  Heb. 
mn^  ^r>'n  ZXli^'^n  hayitab  becnt  Yc- 
hovah,  should  it  have  been  good  in  the 
eyes  of  Jehovah  ?  Jerus.  Targ.  *  Lo, 
if  I  had  eaten  the  sin-offering  to-day, 
were  it  possible  that  it  could  be  accept- 
able and  right  before  the  Lord  ?' 

20.  He  was  content.  Heb.Ti3'^5''D:it3'i"' 
yitab  becnauv,  it  uas  good  in  his  eyes, 
Gr.  npeacv  aum,  it  pleased  him.  So  in 
other  cases  the  letter  of  the  law  was 
dispensed  with  from  the  pressure  of 
circumstances,  as  when  David  ate  the 
show-bread,  and  Hezekiah  admitted 
some  that  were  not  duly  cleansed,  to 
eat  of  the  passover.    2  Chron.  30. 18-20. 

Remarks,— (1.)  The  most  joyful 
and  festive  scenes  may  be  suddenly 
clouded   and   turned    to  gloom  by  the 


B.  C.  1490.J 


CHAPTER  XL 


91 


unexpected  inroad  of  divine  judgments. 
Let  us  therefore  rejoice  with  trembling. 

(1.)  '  Wliich  he  commanded  not.' 
How  dangerous  to  innovoie  upon,  or 
tamper  whli,  the  institutions  of  Heaven! 
God  is  peculiarly  jealous  of  the  purity 
of  his  ordinances,  and  watches  with 
avenging  vigilance  around  the  worship 
of  his  altar.  He  will  accept  of  no 
'  strange  fire,'  either  in  the  matter  or 
motives  of  the  ofierings  presented  to 
him.  » 

(2.)  Nadab  and  Abihu  sinned  by 
s« range  fire,  and  were  punished  by 
strange  fire.  Men's  punishments  are 
often  marked  by  a  striking  analogy 
with  their  sins. 

(3.)  The  mind  and  will  of  God  is 
sometimes  to  be  learned  by  inference 
from  the  general  scope  and  tenor  of  his 
word,  instead  of  express  revelation  ; 
and  we  ai;e  not  to  suppose  that  an  act 
or  a  practice  may  be  lawfully  indulged 
in,  because  it  is  not,  in  so  many  words, 
forbidden  in  the  Scriptures.  The  ques- 
tion is,  does  ihg  general  spirit  of  the 
Bible  forbid  it?  Of  this,  every  man 
must  judge  as  in  the  sight  of  God,  and 
act  accordingly. 

(3.)  It  is  of  infinitely  more  conse- 
quence that  the  Most  High  should  be 
sanctified,  and  his  name  glorified,  llian 
that  the  lives  of  our  children,  however 
dear  to  us,  should  be  preserved. 

(3.)  The  most  comforting  considera- 
tions under  affliction,  are  those  which 
are  drawn  from  the  word  of  God.  There 
is  no  such  source  of  consolation  to 
mourners  as  his  own  precious  truth. 

(6.)  *  Uncover  not  your  heads.'  The 
public  concerns  of  God's  glory  should 
lie  nearer  our  hearts  than  any  private 
griefs,  pVeasures,  or  pursuits.  The 
'  sorrow  of  the  world  '  is  often  a  great 
hindrance  to  the  performance  of  re- 
listious  duties. 


CHAPTER  XI. 
The  distinction  of  living  creatures 
into  clean,   and  unclean^   forming  the 
basis  of  the  dietetical  system  of  the 


Jews,  is  the  subject  mainly  treated  in 
the  present  chapter.  As  this  is  a  sub- 
ject of  great  importance  in  the  Mosaical 
i.islitutes,  we  shall  consider  it  at  some 
length,  particularly  in  reference  to  the 
design  of  the  distinctions  here  estab- 
lished, and  the  principles  involved  in 
them.  And  we  remark,  in  the  outset, 
that  the  distinction  of  the  animal  tribes 
into  clean  and  unclean,  is  founded  not 
so  much  upon  any  thing  in  the  nature 
of  their  habits,  as  more  or  less  cleanly, 
but  upon  the  circumstance,  that  one 
class  of  ihem  was  to  be  eaten  for  food, 
and  the  other  not.  This  appears  very 
plainly  from  vv.  46,  47,  of  this  chapter, 
where  the  whole  is  summed  up:  *  This 
is  the  law  of  the  beasts, and  of  ihefovi'l, 
and  of  every  living  creature  that  moveih 
in  the  waters,  and  of  every  creature 
that  creepelh  upon  the  earth  ;  to  make 
a  difference  between  the  unclean  and 
the  clean,  and  between  (i.  e.  even  be- 
tween) the  bfiast  that  may  be  eaten  and 
the  beast  that  may  not  be  eaten.'  The 
latter  clause  explains  the  former,  show- 
ing, that  to  say  a  beast  may  be  eaten 
or  not  eaten,  is  equivalent  to  saying  it 
is  clean  or  unclean.  These  epithets 
are  undoubtedly  tantamount  to  ttsual,  or 
not  usual,  for  food  ;  and  consequently 
the  distinction  is  not  one  with  which  we 
are  entirely  unacquainted  ;  for  by  using 
some  species  of  flesh-meat  on  our  tables 
and  rejecting  others,  we  do  in  effect 
make  this  very  distinction,  though  we 
do  not  express  it  in  the  same  form  of 
words.  Indeed  it  does  not  appear  that 
any  animal  is  fojbidden  for  food  in  this 
chapter,  which  Abraham  or  his  de- 
scendants in  any  previous  period  were 
probably  in  the  habit  of  eating;  so  that 
these  precepts,  like  many  others  in  the 
Pentateuch,  merely  convert  national 
custom  into  positive  law,  with  perhaps 
some  slight  exclusions  on  the  one  hand 
and  admissions  on  the  other. 

If,  then,  to  declare  an  animal  clean 
or  unclean,  was  merely  to  pronounce  it 
fit  or  unfit  to  be  eaten,  it  follows  that 
there  was  nothing  contemptuous  or  de« 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490 


grading  in  the  use  of  the  epithet  unclean 
in  this  connexion.  Nor  is  there  any 
greater  mistake  than  to  suppose  that 
the  Jews  were  forbidden  to  keep  un- 
clean animals  in  their  houses  or  stalls, 
or  to  have  any  thing  to  do  with  them. 
On  the  contrary,  the  camel,  and  the 
ass,  and,  in  later  times,  the  horse,  were 
iheir  common  beasts  of  burden,  though 
all  the  three  species  were  unclean.  In- 
deed, as  Michaelis  observes,  in  this 
sense  man  himself  was  the  most  unclean 
of  all  creatures,  for  he  was  lacking  in 
the  physical  conditions  of  a  clean  ani- 
mal, and  none  but  a  cannibal  would  ever 
think  of  such  a  horrid  profanation  as 
eating  human  flesh. 

In  considering  the  design  of  the  enact- 
ments contained  in  this  chapter,  con- 
\erling  ancient  customs  into  immutable 
laws,  we  may  safely  admit  that  it  was 
inuinly  to  keep  the  Ilchreu-s  more  per- 
fectly separate  from  all  other  nations. 
They  were  to  continue  a  distinct  people 
by  themselves,  dwelling  all  together  in 
Palestine,  and  having  as  little  inter- 
course as  possible  with  the  neighboring 
nations.  There  was,  indeed,  an  end 
ulterior  to  this  to  be  answered  by  their 
isolation  from  the  rest  of  the  world. 
Cod  intended  by  this  arrangement  that 
they  should  be  preserved  from  idolatry, 
and  the  concomitant  vices  then  so  fear- 
fully rife  among  the  Canaanitish  tribes. 
This  is  clearly  intimated  Lev.  20. 25, 26, 
ill  immediate  connexion  with  the  warn- 
ing, *  Ye  shall  not  walk  in  the  manners 
ot  the  nations  which  I  cast  out  before 
you :  for  they  commftted  all  these 
ihings,  and  therefore  I  abhorred' them.' 
He  then  proceeds  to  say,  *  Ye  shall 
therefore  put  difference  between  clean 
beasts  and  unclean,  and  between  unclean 
fowls  and  clean  :  and  ye  shall  not  make 
your  souls  abominable  by  beast  or  by 
fowl,  or  by  any  manner  of  living  thing 
that  creepeth  on  the  ground,  which  I 
have  separated  from  you  as  unclean. 
And  ye  shall  be  holy  unto  me:  for  I 
the  Lord  am  holy,  and  have  severed 
you  from  other  people,  that  ye  should 


be  mine.'  And  in  a  subsequent  part  of 
the  sacred  narrative,  we  learn  the 
actual  effect  that  followed  from  the 
overleaping  of  this  separating  wall, 
Num.  25.  2,  3 :  *  And  they  called  the 
people  unto  the  sacrifices  of  their  gods : 
and  the  people  did  eat,  and  bowed  doivn 
to  their  gods.  And  Israel  joined  him- 
self unto  Baal-peor:  and  the  anger  of 
the  Lord  was  kindled  against  Israel.' 

To  compass  the  object  of  separation, 
therefore,  nothing  could  be  better  adapt- 
ed than  the  enactment  of  laws  interdict- 
ing the  use  of  certain  articles  of  food 
common  among  other  tribes,  which  the 
rites  of  hospitality  would  naturally  be 
sure  to  urge  upon  them.  They  were 
regulations,  therefore,  tending  directly 
to  break  up  all  social  intercourse  be- 
tween them  and  their  idolatrous  neigh- 
bors. '  Intimate  friendships,'  says  Mi 
chaelis,  *  are  in  most  cases  formed  at 
table  ;  and  with  the  man  with  whom  I 
can  neither  eat  nor  drink,  let  our  inter 
course  in  business  be  what  it  may,  I 
shall  seldom  become  so  familiar  as 
with  him  whose  guest  I  am,  and  he  mine. 
If  we  have,  besides,  from  education,  an 
abhorrence  of  the  food  which  others  eat, 
this  forms  a  new  obstacle  to  closer  in- 
timacy.' 

The  editor  of  the  Pictorial  Bible 
(Mr.  Kitto)  confirms  this  remark  by 
the  results  of  his  own  experience  :  '  The 
truth  of  this  observation  must  be  obvious 
to  every  person  acquainted  with  the 
East,  where,  on  account  of  the  natives 
regarding  as  unclean  many  articles  of 
food  and  modes  of  preparation  in  which 
Europeans  indulge,  travelers  or  residents 
fi'nd  it  impossible  to  associate  intimate- 
ly with  conscientious  Mohammedans  or 
Hindoos.  Nothing  more  efifectual  could 
be  devised  to  keep  one  people  distinct 
from  another.  It  causes  the  diflerence 
between  them  to  be  ever  present  to  the 
mind,  touching,  as  it  does,  upon  so 
many  points  of  social  and  every-day 
contact ;  and  it  is  therefore  far  more 
efficient  in  its  results  as  a  rule  of  dis- 
tinction than  any  difference  in  doctrine, 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XL 


worship,  or  morals,  which  men  could 
eiiteriaiii.  While  the  writer  of  this 
note  was  in  Asia,  he  had  almost  daily 
occasion  to  be  convinced  of  the  incalcu- 
lable eflicacy  of  such  distinctions  in 
krepinj  men  apart  from  strangers.  A 
Mohammedan,  for  instance,  might  be 
liind,  liberal,  indulgent ;  but  the  recur- 
ViMice  of  a  meal  or  any  eating,  threw 
him  back  upon  his  own  distinctive  prac- 
tices and  habits,  reminding  him  that 
you  were  an  unclean  person  from  your 
liibits  of  indulgence  in  foods  and  drinks 
forbidden  to  him,  and  that  his  own 
purity  was  endangered  by  communica- 
tion with  \ou.  Your  own  perception 
of  this  feeling  in  him  is  not  to  you  less 
painful  and  discouraging  to  intercourse, 
than  its  existence  is  to  him  who  enter- 
t  iins  it.  It  is  a  mutual  repulsion  con- 
tinually operating  ;  and  its  effect  may 
be  estimated  from  the  fact,  that  no 
liaiion,  in  which  a  distinction  of  meats 
was  rigidly  enforced  as  part  of  a  re- 
ligious system,  has  ever  changed  its 
I'eligion.  Oriental  legislators  have 
been  generally  aware  of  the  effect  of 
such  regulations  ,•  and  hence  through 
most  parts  of  Asia  we  find  a  religious 
distinction  of  meats  in  very  active  ope- 
ration, and  so  arranged  as  to  prevent 
social  intercourse  with  people  of  a  dif- 
ferent faith.  In  the  chapter  before  us 
it  is  not  difficult  to  discover,  that  the 
l!-raeliles,  in  attending  to  its  injunc- 
tions, must  be  precluded  from  social 
intercourse  with  any  of  their  neighbors. 
As  to  the  Egyptians,  they  had  them- 
selves a  system  of  national  laws  on  this 
point,  which  restrained  them  from  in- 
tercourse with  strangers.  They  could 
not  eat  with  the  Israelites,  even  in  the 
time  of  Jacob.  Some  of  the  animals 
which  the  Israelites  were  allowed  to 
eat,  the  cow,  for  instance,  were  never 
slaughtered  by  the  Egyptians,  being 
sacred  to  some  god  ;  while,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  Israelites  were  interdicted 
some  animals  which  the  Egyptians  ate 
freely.  Then  as  to  the  Canaanites  or 
Phcrnicians,  they  seem  to  have  eaten 


not  only  those  meats  prohibited  by- 
Moses,  which  we  usually  eat,  but  also 
others,  of  which  the  flesh  of  dogs  was 
one.  With  regard  to  the  Arabs,  they 
were  nearly  related  to  the  Israelites, 
and  their  practices  were  less  corrupt 
than  those  of  the  Egyptians  and  Ca- 
naanites, whence  the  difference  of  food 
is  not  so  strongly  marked  ;  but  still  it 
was  quite  enough  to  hinder  the  intimacy 
of  the  two  nations.  The  camel  not 
only  constitutes  the  principal  wealth 
of  the  Arabs,  but  its  flesh  is  a  prin- 
cipal animal  food  ;  besides  which  they 
eat  the  hare,  and  the  jerboa — all  these 
are  forbidden  in  this  chapter,  the  last 
under  the  name  of  mouse.'  If  even  at 
this  distance  of  time  we  can  discover 
such  differences  between  the  diet  of  the 
Hebrews  and  that  of  their  neighbors, 
we  may  easily  conceive  that  a  more 
intimate  acquaintance  with  the  diet  of 
the  latter  would  exhibit  more  important 
and  numerous  distinctions.' 

Subordinate  to  the  above  was  another 
end  to  be  answered  by  the  prohibition 
of  the  unclean  class  of  animals,  viz., 
the  furnishing  of  the  covenant  people 
with  a  code  of  wholesome  dietetics. 
Not,  however,  that  this  reason  holds  in 
regard  to  all  the  prohibitions  relative  to 
unclean  beasts  ;  for  it  cannot  be  ques- 
tioned that  among  the  animals  denom- 
inated unclean,  there  were  many  which 
might  safely  and  salubriously  be  used 
for  food,  and  which  are  so  used  by 
different  people  at  the  present  day.  It 
is  also  to  be  observed  that  diet  connects 
itself  with  climate,  temperament,  and 
general  habit,  in  such  a  manner,  that 
what  is  innocent  or  salutary  in  one  re- 
gion, or  one  state  of  society,  would  be 
decidedly  noxious  in  another.  Yet  that 
dietetical  considerations  did  actually 
enter  into  the  reasons  of  these  appoint- 
ments, is  the  unanimous  opinion  of  the 
ancient  Jews,  and  is  a  point  which 
Maimonides  especially  labors  to  prove. 
(Mor.  Nevoch.  p.  3,  ch.  48.)  There 
can  be  no  question,  at  any  rate,  that  we 
are  thus  to  account  for  the  prohibition 


04 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


of  swine's  flesh.  It  has  long  been  con- 
ceded that  Uie  use  of  tliis  food  favors 
the  spread  of  cutaneous  diseases,  par- 
ticularly where  any  circumstances  of 
predisposition  from  climate  or  tempera- 
ment exist.  So  also  there  is  good  rea- 
son to  believe  that  the  use  of  pork  tended 
to  produce  the  leprosy,  a  disease  which 
is  presently  to  come  before  us  in  a 
diiFerent  connexion,  and  which  was  of 
so  shocking  a  nature,  that  too  severe 
precautions  could  not  well  be  taken  to 
prevent  it.  Indeed,  we  think  it  would 
be  found,  on  a  lijorough  investigation, 
that  the  nutriment  afforded  by  the  flesh 
of  the  interdicted  animals  in  general 
was  less  wholesome,  and  more  favorable 
to  the  production  of  scrofulous  and 
scorbutic  disorders,  than  that  of  almost 
any  included  in  the  list  of  permitted 
meals.  That  the  Divine  Legislator 
sliould  haTc  regard  to  the  well-being  of 
his  people  in  this  respect,  and  should 
enact  such  laws  as  would  tend  to  guard 
them  from  the  inroads  of  epidemic  and 
contagious  disease,  will  appear  reason- 
able to  the  slightest  reflection,  espe- 
cially when  we  consider  that  his  care 
extended,  in  other  matters,  to  the  mi- 
nutest points  that  related  to  tlieir  per- 
sonal safety  and  comfort ;  as,  for  in- 
stance, to  the  articles  of  their  apparel 
and  the  style  of  their  building.  Nor  is 
it  to  be  forgotten  that  the  situation  of 
the  people  under  the  Leviiical  code 
created  a  peculiar  exigency  in  this  re- 
spect. Through  the  whole  period  of 
their  wanderings  in  the  wilderness,  the 
encampment  was  very  much  in  the 
condition  of  a  crowded  garrison,  and 
the  breaking  out  of  a  violent  epidemic 
among  them  would  have  been  equally 
easy  and  destructive.  Every  tendency, 
therefore,  to  such  an  occurrence  was  to 
be  guarded  against  with  the  most  vig- 
ilant care.  And  even  when  settled  in 
Canaan,  the  Jews  were  still  to  be  a  very 
compact  population,  inhabiting  a  terri- 
tory small  in  proportion  to  their  num- 
bers, and  therefore  equally  needing  a 
rigid  health  police  as  a  security  against 


the  ravages  of  fatal  epidemics  among 
them. 

In  addition  to  the  above  considera. 
tions,  some  have  been  disposed  to  re- 
cognize another,  in  the  alleged  fact  that 
the  eating  of  certain  animals  exercises 
a  specific  influence  on  the  moral  tern* 
perament ;  as  if,  for  instance,  the  use 
of  camels' flesh — an  animal  said  to  be 
of  a  revengeful  temper — tended  to  im- 
part a  vindictive  propensity  to  the  eater, 
and  of  that  of  the  swine  to  render  one 
gross  and  sensual.  But  of  this  fact 
there  is  too  little  positive  proof  to  make 
it  of  much  account  in  this  connexion. 
That  such  an  influence  may  be  exerted 
to  a  certain  degree,  and  in  certain 
forms,  need  not  perhaps  be  denied  ;  but 
is  probably  too  slight  to  come  within 
the  range  of  reasons  which  dictated  the 
present  discriminations. 

But  in  seeking  for  the  designs  of  In- 
finite Wisdom  in  the  regulations  before 
us,  we  do  not  feel  restrained  from  taking 
into  view  certain  moral  and  typical  con- 
siderations which  we  doubt  not  weigh- 
ed, in  their  measure,  with  the  Most 
High  in  the  establishment  of  these  dis- 
tinctions. It  is  a  remark  of  Ainsworih, 
that  '  by  beasts  are  spiritually  signified 
peoples  of  sundry  sorts  ;  and  by  eating 
or  not  eating,  is  meant  communion  with 
or  abstaining  from  them,  as  by  the 
vision  showed  unto  Peter  the  Holy 
Ghost  expounded  this  law.'  In  this 
vision,  it  will  be  recollected,  the  apostle 
saw  a  great  white  sheet  let  down  to  the 
earth,  containing  all  manner  of  four- 
footed  beasts,  creeping  things,  and 
fowls  of  the  air,  and  heard  at  the  same 
time  a  voice  commanding  him,  not- 
withstanding his  scruples,  to  rise,  kill, 
and  eat,  for  that  that  which  God  had 
cleansed  was  no  longer  to  be  accounted 
common  or  unclean.  Immediately  after 
this  supernatural  exhibition,  the  apostle 
went,  under  tlie  direction  of  the  Spirit, 
to  the  house  of  Cornelius,  a  devout 
Roman,  whom  God  liad  chosen  into 
that  Christian  church,  of  wliich  the 
visionary  sheet  was  a  figure,  from  its 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XI. 


05 


comprehending  people  of  all  nations, 
gathered  from  the  four  winds  or  quar- 
ters of  the  earth,  and  symbolically  in- 
closed in  white  linen,  to  signify  the 
Christian  purity  and  rectitudt?.  Having 
cMiored  the  house  of  Cornelius,  he  ob- 
MTved.to  those  present,  '  Ye  know  how 
thai  it  is  an  unlawful  thing  for  a  man 
llitt  is  a  Jew  to  keep  company  or  to  [ 
come  unto  one  of  another  nation  ;  but 
God  hath  showed  me  that  I  should  not 
call  any  man  common  or  unclean.' 
Hire  we  have  an  apostolical  comment 
upon  the  purport  of  this  vision.  God 
liiid  showed  him  that  he  should  call  no 
living  creatures  unclean;  but  by  these 
beasls  of  all  kinds  he  understands  7nen 
of  all  nations — and  in  this  his  interpre- 
tation no  doubt  accorded  with  the  drift 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  prompting  Ihe 
virion.  We  are  conducted  then  at  once 
to  tiie  inference,  if  the  liberty  was  now 
granted  to  Peter  of  feeding  upon  the 
llesh  of  unclean  animals,  as  the  sign  of 
a  newly  opened  intercourse  between  the 
Jews  and  the  Gentiles,  that  it  was  the 
original  intention  of  the  contrary  pro- 
hibition to  forbid  the  Hebrews  holding 
fellowship  with  heathen  and  idolaters. 
For  a  permission  in  one  of  these  cases 
would  not  imply  a  permission  in  the 
other,  unless  it  had  been  well  under- 
stood that  a  restraint  in  the  one  had 
always  implied  a  restraint  in  the  other. 
To  say  that  animals  formerly  prohibited 
as  unclean  might  now  be  eaten,  was  in 
eflect  to  say  that  the  heathen  might 
now  be  safely  conversed  with  and 
preached  to.  Consequently  the  contrary 
injunction,  that  these  creatures  should 
not  be  eaten,  was  equivalent  to  a  verbal 
command  that  the  people  of  God  should 
abstain  from  all  familiar  intercourse 
with  the  heathen  world. 

All  this  is  doubtless  very  obvious. 
Under  the  Jewish  economy  this  rigid 
interdict  of  fellowship  with  the  Gentiles 
obtained.  Under  the  gospel  dispensa- 
tion it  is  done  away  ;  and  accordingly, 
when  this  event  is  predicted  by  Isaiah, 
he  represents  it  under  the  image  of  a 


preternatural  reconciliation  between  the 
clean  and  the  unclean  species  of  ani- 
mals.  Is.  11.  6-9,  <  The  wolf  also  shall 
dwell  with  the  lamb,  and  the  leopard 
shall  lie  down  with  the  kid  ;  and  the 
calf  and  the  young  lion  and  tiie  falling 
together;  and  a  little  child  shall  lead 
them.  And  the  cow  and  the  bear  shall 
feed  ;  their  young  ones  shall  lie  down 
together :  and  the  lion  shall  eat  straw 
like  the  ox.  And  the  sucking  child 
shall  play  on  tlie  hole  of  the  asp,  and 
the  weaned  child  shall  put  his  hand  on 
the  cockatrice's  den.  They  shall  not 
hurt  nor  destroy  in  all  my  holy  moun- 
tain: for  the  earth  shall  be  full  of  the 
knowledge  of  the  Lord,  as  the  waters 
cover  the  sea.' 

But  why  pre  certain  animals  select- 
ed as  fitting  types  of  heathen  tribes, 
and  accordingly  denominated  unclean  ? 
Nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  the 
uncleanness  attributed  to  brute  crea- 
tures is  not  actual  and  inherent;  for 
they  innocently  follow  their  several 
instincts — the  wolf  when  it  devours  the 
lamb,  and  the  swine  when  it  wallows 
in  the  mire.  The  instinct  of  the  wolf 
is  not  cruelty,  but  appetite  ;  and  the 
foulness  of  the  swine  is  as  blameless  as 
the  scent  of  the  dunghill.  Yet  on  these 
very  accounts  they  serve  as  striking 
symbols  of  bad  men,  who  by  imitating 
the  vicious  or  loathsome  propensities 
of  certain  brutes,  sink  themselves  from 
the  dignity  of  men  and  Christians,  to  a 
level  with  '  the  beasts  that  perish.' 
We  see,  then,  an  intrinsic  aptitude  in 
certain  animals  to  shadow  forth  certain 
classes  of  men ;  and  if  the  unclean 
beasts  represented  thus  symbolically 
the  depraved  Gentiles,  the  clean  ones, 
on  the  same  principle,  would  stand  as 
the  appropriate  type  of  the  upright  and 
obedient  Israelites  ;  and  hence  the 
peculiar  pertinency  and  force  of  our 
Savior's  direction  to  his  disciples,  '  Go 
not  into  the  way  of  the  Gentiles,  but  go 
rather  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of 
Israel.' 

But  let  us  descend  to  a  closer  survey 


06 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  149a 


of  the  particulars  of  this  institution,  and 
see  what  animals  are  assigned  to  the 
respective  classes,  and  how  their  quali- 
ties, symbolically  understood,  corres- 
pond with  the  character  of  the  different 
persons  whom  they  are  intended  to 
re])resent.  The  chapter  before  us  pre- 
senis  on  the  good  and  peaceable  side, 
amongst  the  clean  creatures,  the  ox,  the 
tiieep,  the  goat,  the  lamb  ;  all  fishes 
with  fins  and  scales,  and  of  the  fowls, 
ilie  dove,  the  pigeon,  the  lark,  &c., 
whose  habits  are  agteeable,  and  their 
fiesh  grateful.  On  the  other  side  we 
find  arrayed  the  dog,  the  swine,  the 
wolf,  the  fox,  the  lion,  the  tiger  j  of 
birds,  the  vulture,  the  kite,  the  raven, 
the  owl,  the  bat  j  of  reptiles,  the  whole 
serpent  tribe,  with  the  eel  and  the 
water-snake  ;  and  finally  all  insects  and 
worms,  and  the  various  species  of  tes- 
tacea. 

In  regard  to  all  these,  and  many  other 
creatures  of  kindred  species,  it  is  evi- 
dent, upon  the  bare  recital,  that  their 
properties  and  instincts  render  them 
most  striking  representatives  of  the 
several  classes  of  men  intended  to  be 
set  forth  by  them  ;  and  yet  we  have  in 
the  outset  of  this  chapter  a  still  more 
compendious  mode  of  distinguishing 
the  quadrupeds,  by  certain  external 
characteristics,  strikingly  indicative  of 
their  internal  natures  and  dispositions. 
Here  we  see  that  those  only  were  ad- 
mitted into  the  clean  class  of  animals 
which  divide  the  hoof  and  chew  the  cud. 
Creatures  of  this  class,  it  is  well  known, 
are  generally  marked  by  a  harmless  and 
tractable  disposition,  besides  being  of 
the  utmost  service  to  man  for  domestic 
purposes ;  and  it  might  be  sufficient  to 
insist  upon  these  properties  alone  as  a 
ground  for  the  distinction  in  their  favor. 
But  we  see  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the 
distinguishing  traits  of  these  animals 
are  expressive  also  of  the  moral  endow- 
ments which  are  prominent  in  the  sub 
jects  represented.  Certain  it  is,  that 
an  animal  with  a  cloven  hoof  is  more 
inoffensive  with  its  feet  than  the  several 


tribes  of  wild  beasts  whose  paws  are 
armed  with  sharp  claws  to  seize  their 
prey,  or  than  the  horse,  whose  feet  are 
such  formidable  weapons  of  offence  ; 
or  the  dog,  who,  though  not  armed 
with  claws,  like  the  bear  or  tiger,  is 
yet  furnished  with  feet  of  great  swift- 
ness.  fitting  him  to  pursue  and  destroy 
such  creatures  as  are  gentle  and  de- 
fenceless. 

Again,  another  peculiar  characteris- 
tic of  clean  beasts,  is  that  of  cheicing 
the  cud — a  faculty  so  expressive  of  that 
act  of  the  mind  by  which  it  revolves, 
meditates,  and  reasons  upon  what  it 
receives  within  it,  that  the  word  rumi- 
nate, from  rumen,  the  s^ottioc/i,  distinc- 
tive of  this  class  of  animals,  has  be- 
come an  established  metaphorical  term 
in  our  language,  by  which  to  express 
the  act  of  the  mind  in  studious  medita- 
tion or  pondering.  An  animal  thus 
employed  has  remarkably  an  air  of 
abstraction  in  its  countenance,  as  if 
engaged  in  some  deep  meditation  ;  so 
that  we  cannot  well  conceive  of  a  more 
fitting  symbol  of  that  attribute  of  a 
good  man  which  disposes  him  to  the 
I  devout  contemplation  of  sacred  things, 
and  which  the  Psalmist  so  graphically 
portrays,  Ps.  1.2,'  His  delight  is  in  the 
law  of  the  Lord,  and  in  his  law  doth  he 
meditate  day  and  night.'  The  word  of 
God  is  the  true  pabulum  of  the  pious 
soul  ;  and  when  John  in  vision  took  the 
little  prophetical  book  from  the  angel's 
hand,  and  ate  it,  we  see  by  the  effects 
produced,  that  the  profound  study  of 
its  contents,  as  laden  with  announce- 
ments of  woe,  could  embitter  to  the 
stomach  what  was  exquisitely  grateful 
to  the  palate  ;  thus  teaching  us  that  the 
pleasure  of  knowing  is  sometimes  coun- 
terbalanced by  the  pain  of  the  things 
known. 

It  would  doubtless  be  easy  to  extend 
the  application  of  these  remarks  to  the 
several  orders  of  terrestrial,  aerial,  and 
aquatic  creatures  which  come  into  the 
enumeration  before  us  ;  but  as  our 
preface  to  the    present    chapter    has 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XJ. 


97 


CHAPTER  XL 

\  ND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
'^*-  ses  and  to  Aaron,  saying  unto 
them, 

2  Speak  unto  the  children  of 
Israel,    saying,    a  These    are    the 

a  Deut.  14.  4.     Acts  10.  V2,  14. 


uh-eady  far  exceeded  our  usual  limits, 
we  content  ourselves  with  what  has 
;, 'ready  been ofie red.  The  illustrations 
giviMi  afford  but  another  evidence  of  the 
consummate  wisdom  and  benignity 
which  shine  through  the  appointments 
of  the  Levilical  code. 

The  Bistmction  of  Clean  and  Unclean 
Animals. 

1.  The  Lord  spake  unto  Moses  and  to 
Aaron.  As  joint  representatives  of  the 
magisterial  and  priestly  power.  The 
cognizance  of  the  following  injunctions 
bflonged  to  both.  The  Priest  was  to 
direct  the  people  where  any  doubt  oc- 
curred as  to  things  forbidden  or  allowed, 
ami  the  Magistrate  was  to  see  that  the 
<lirection  was  followed.  Comp.  Num. 
9.  6,  2  Chron.  29. 5,-30.  IS,  Ezek.  44. 23. 

2,  3.  These  are  the  beasts  u-hich  ye 
shall  eat  among  all  the  beasts,  &c.  The 
lleb.  has  here  two  distinct  words  for 
*  beasts,'  nTt  'haydh,  and  rt'J2r]'2  behc- 
mah,  a  distinction  which  is  wholly 
lost  sight  of  in  our  version,  and  the 
same  is  the  case  in  the  Septuagint. 
The  first  properly  implies  living  crea- 
tures in  general,  whether  beasts, fishes, 
fi)wls,  or  creeping  things;  the  second 
denotes  quadrupeds  only,  especially 
those   of   the  domestic  kind,    usually 

denominated     cattle. IT  Whatsoever 

parteth  the  hoof,  Sac.  The  first  grand 
rule  of  distinction  laid  down  has  respect 
to  quadrupeds,  and  is  this — that  all 
beasts  that  have  their  feet  completely 
cloven,  above  as  well  as  heloiv,  and  at  the 
same  time  chew  the  cud,  were  to  be  ac- 
counted clean.  Those  which  had  nei- 
ther, or  indeed  were  wanting  in  one  of 
these  distinguishing  marks,  were  to  be 
held  unclean.     The  parting  of  the  hoof, 

9 


beasts  which  ye  shall  eat  among 
all  the  beasts  that  ai-e  on  the  earth. 
3  Whatsoever  parteth  the  hoof, 
and  is  cloven-footed,  and  cheweih 
the  cud  among  the  beasts,  that 
shall  ve  eat. 


however,  in  order  to  bring  them  within 
the  specified  class,  must  be  perfect,  as 
is  intimated  by  the  additional  epithet 
'cloven-footed,'  or  as  the  Heb.  has  it, 
'  that  cleaveth  asunder  (i.  e.  entirely 
asunder)  the  cleft  of  the  hoofs.'  A 
division  of  hoof  contrary  to  that  which 
is  here  required  is  to  be  seen  in  the  foot 
of  the  dog,  the  cat,  and  the  lion,  where, 
though  there  arc  several  distinct  toes 
or  claws  on  the  upper  side,  yet  they  are 
united  by  a  membrane  on  the  lower 
side.  The  .parting,  therefore,  is  not 
perfect.  \Yhereas  in  the  foot  of  the  ox, 
the  sheep,  and  the  goat,  the  cleaving 
extends  quite  through  the  foot,  and  as 
far  below  as  above.  Animals  of  hoofs 
wholly  solid,  and  unparted,  as  the  horse, 

were  of  course  unclean. IT  Cheiccth 

the  cud.  Heb.  ni3  lnjD5/'?3  malilath 
gCrah,  making  the  cud  to  ascend.  That 
is,  such  animals  as  bring  up  again  the 
cud  from  the  stomach  to  the  mouth,  to 
be  more  thoroughly  masticated,  as  is 
the  case  with  the  ox,  and  the  other 
ruminating  animals.  The  original 
word,  n"l3  gcrah,  comes  from  a  root 
signifying  to  draw,  from  the  chewed 
mass  being  again  drawn  up  into  the 
mouth  to  be  remasticated  ;  and  the  Gr. 
/jfj5t)<(7^oj  is  equivalent,  being  derived 
from  niipvo),  to  revolve,  to  turn,  to  toss 
over,  expressive  of  the  action  of  the 
animal's  organs  upon  the  cud.  Indeed, 
the  word  '  ruminate '  is  derived  from 
rumen,  the  name  of  the  first  stomach  in 
the  ox  or  camel,  into  which  the  food  is 
first  received,  and  thence  cast  up  into 
the  mouth.  The  word  '  cud  '  is  sup- 
posed to  be  derived  either  from  the 
Cambro-British  chuyd,a  vomit,  as  it  is 
the  ball  of  food  vomited  or  thrown  up 
into  the  mouth  from  the  stomach  ;  or  a 


LEVITICUS, 


[B.  C.  1490. 


4  Nevertheless,  these  shall  ye  not    cud,  hut  divideth  not  the  hoof;  he 
eat,  of  ihem  that  chew  the  cud,  or    25  unclean  unto  you. 
of  them  that  divide  the  hoof:  as  j    5  And    the    coney,   because    he 
the  camel,  because  he  cheweth  the  j  cheweth  the  cud,  but  divideth  not 

i  the  hoof;  he  is  unclean  vinto  you. 


contraction  of  chewed,  from  the  verb  to 
chew.—'  The  reader  will  not  fail  to  ob-  | 
serve,  that  ibe  beaulirally  simple  and 
scientific  division  of  quadrupeds  here 
slated  on  divine  aulhorily  at  so  early  a 
period,  is  one  which  has  never  yet,  after 
all  the  improvements  in  natural  liislory, 
become  obsolete  ;  but,  on  the  contrary, 
is  one  which  the  greatest  masters  of 
the  science  liave  continued  to  consider 
useful.  Michaelis  says  this  is  *  won- 
derful.' But  it  is  not  wonderful  when 
we  recollect  who  was  its  author— not 
Moses,  but  God.  It  would  have  been 
wonderful  if,  as  Michaslis  seems  to 
think,  it  evinced  the  progress  which 
men  had  then  made  in  the  science  of 
natural  history  }  but  it  is  in  fact  very 
doubtful  whether  the  Israelites,  or  even 
Moses  himself,  understood  the  princi- 
ples on  which  the  distinction  was 
established.  After  staling  the  general 
principle,  a  few  examples  are  given  to 
illustrate  its  application.'— P/c?.  Bib. 

4.  Nevertheless  these  shall  ye  not  cat, 
&c.  Having  slated  ihe  general  princi- 
pie,  the  writer  goes  on  lo  illustrate  its 
application.  When  either  of  the  speci- 
fied conditions  were  wanting,  whether 
in  whole  or  in  part,  viz.,  if  a  beast 
chewed  the  cud,  but  had  not  its  hoof 
perfectly  parted  in  two,  as  the  camel, 
the  coney,  and  the  hare,  or  if  its  hoof 
were  parted,  and  yet  it  did  not  chew  the 
cud,  as  the  swine  ;  then  they  were  pos- 
itively interdicted,  and  the  touching 
their  dead  carcasses  caused  such  a  de- 
filement as  legally  disqualified  one 
from  engaging  in  the  worship  of  the 
tabernacle  till  he  were  ceremonially 
cleansed.  But  in  the  case  of  certain 
quadrupeds,  a  doubt  might  arise  whe- 
ther they  do  fully  divide  the  hoof  or 
ruminate.  Whether  the  hare,  for  ex- 
ample, ruminates,  is  a  point  not  easily 


settled  ;  and  %o  while  the  camel  rumi- 
nates; the  requisite  parting  of  the  hoof 
might  be  a  matter  subject  to  considera- 
ble doubt.  In  point  ol  fact,  the  foot  of 
the  camel  is  divided  into  two  loes,  and 
the  division  below  is  complete,  so  lliat 
the  animal  might  be  accounted  clean  j 
but  then  it  does  not  extend  the  whole 
length  oi'  the  foot,  but  only  to  the  fore 
part;  for  behirwl  it  is  not  parted,  and 
we  find  besides  under  it,  and  connected 
with  it,  a  kind  of  cushion  or  elastic 
pad,  on  which  the  camel  goes.  Now 
in  this  dubious  stale  of  circumstances, 
Moses  authoritatively  decides  that  the 
camel  has  not  the  hoof  fully  divided  } 
and  so  of  the  other  animals  mentioned 
in  tlie  sequel.  The  accompanying 
figure  will  give  a  tolerably  correct  idea 
of  the  form  of  this  anin)al's  foot. 


The  Camel's  Foot. 
.  5  The  coney.  Heb.  "^Sm  hajthsha- 
phan.  In  reference  to  tliis  animal  we 
give  the  note  of  Mr.  Kitto  on  Prov.  30. 
26,  '  The  conies  are  but  a  feeble  folk, 
yet  make  they  their  houses  in  the  rocks.' 
~-f  It  is  on  the  sole  authority  of  the 


B.  C.  1490.]  CHAPTER  XI. 

6  And  the  hare,  because  he  cheW' 


99 


eth  the  cud,  but  divideth  not  the 
hoof;  he  is  unclean  unto  you. 


Rabbinical  writers  that  tlie  Heb.  "pUS 
shaphan  has  been  identified  with  the 
coney,  or  rabbit.  That  this  conclusion 
cannot  be  correct  is  very  evident.  The 
rabbit  is  not  an  Asiatic  animal,  and  it 
is  very  far  from  being  solicitous  of  a 
rocky  habitation,  which  is  the  distin- 
guishing characteristic  by  which  the  I 
sluipkan  is  here  mentioned.  Some  there-  [ 
fore,  who  reject  this  explanation,  sup- 
pose the  Jerboa  to  be  intended  ;  and  \ 
lliis  o])iiiion  has  the  sanction  of  Bochart, 
probably  from  his  being  unacquainted 
with  the  Daman,  or  Hyrax  Syriacus, 
wliich  corresponds  far  belter  than  any 
other  animal  that  has  been  found  to  the 
brief  intimations  which  the  Scriptures 
convey.  Daman  is  the  Syrian  name  of 
the  animal :  the  Arabs  call  it  Nabr,  and 
the  Abyssinians  Ashkoko.  The  same 
species  is  found  in  Lebanon,  among  the 
mountains  and  rocks  of  Syria  and  Pal- 
estine, in  those  of  Arabia  and  Abyssinia, 
and  probably  extends  to  Southern  Afri- 
ca. Under  its  Abyssinian  name  of 
Ashkoko,  a  very  full  description  of  the 
animal  h.is  been  given  by  Bruce,  and 
the  general  accuracy  of  his  account  has 
been  attested  by  more  recent  observa- 
tions. He  strongly  advocates  its  iden- 
tity with  the  ahaphan  ;  and  shows  how 
inapplicable  the  Scriptural  intimations 
are  to  the  rabbit.  Its  size  corresponds 
nearly  to  that  of  the  hare  ;  and  its  gene- 
ral color  is  gray  mixed  with  a  reddish 
brown,  but  white  under  the  belly,  and 
blackish  about  the  fore  feet.  It  is  so  much 
an  animal  of  the  rock,  that  Bruce  says  he 
never  saw  one  upon  the  ground,  or  from 
among  the  large  stones  at  the  mouth  of 
the  caves,  holes,  and  clefts  of  the  rock, 
in  which  it  resides.  They  are  grega- 
rious animals,  living  in  families;  they 
appear  to  subsist  on  grain,  fruits,  and 
roots  ;  and  certainly  chew  the  cud,  as 
the  shaphan  is  said  to  do  in  Levit.  11.5. 
Bruce  says  that  they  do  not  appear  to 
have  any  cry  ;  and  adds,  that   ihej'  do 


not  stand  upright  in  walking,  but  seem 
to  steal  along,  as  in  fear,  with  the  belly 
near  the  ground,  advancing  a  few  steps 
at  a  time,  and  then  pausing.  *  They 
have  something  very  mild,  feeble-like, 
and  timid  in  their  deportment  ;  art- 
gentle  and  easily  tamed,  though  when 
roughly  handled  at  first,  they  will  bite.' 
Possibly  it  is  to  this  tlrat  Agur  refers 
in  calling  them  '  a  feeble  folk:'  although 
perhaps  this  may  rather  allude  to  their 
feet,  which  are  described  as  being  soft 
and  tender,  very  liable  to  be  hurt  and 
excoriated,  and  which  do  not  enable  the 
animal  to  dig  its  own  habitation,  as 
the  rabbit  does  ;  and  in  this  sense,  the 
text  would  mean  that  the  shaphan,  be- 
ing disqualified  by  the  feebleness  of  its 
feet  from  scooping  out  its  own  habita- 
tion in  the  plain,  has  the  sagacity  to 
seek  in  the  mountain,  habitations  ready 
formed  or  com.pleted  with  ease,  not' 
withstanding  that  the  sharp  asperities 
of  the  rocks  among  whicli  it  is  thus  led 
to  dwell,  might  be  supposed  hurtful  to 
its  feet.  However  this  be  explained, 
it  is  certain  that  they  are  called  'ex- 
ceeding wise,'  with  reference  to  their 
choice  of  habitations  peculiarly  suited 
to  their  condition :  and  they  might  be 
particularly  mentioned  in  tliis  view  from 
the  fact  that  animals  of  the  class  to 
which  they  belong,  are  usually  inhabit- 
ants of  the  plains.  The  flesh  of  the 
shaphan  was  forbidden  to  the  Hebrews; 
and,  in  like  manner,  the  Mohammedans 
and  Christians  of  the  East  equally  ab- 
stain from  the  flesh  of  the  daman.  Cu- 
vier  has  some  interesting  observations, 
showing  the  resemblance,  on  a  small 
scale,  of  this  animal's  skeleton  to  that 
of  the  rhinoceros ;  and  says  there  is  no 
animal  which  more  clearly  proves  the 
necessity ofanatomy  fordetermining  the 
true  conformities  ol  animals. '-Pici.^ift. 
6.  The  hare.  Heb.  T^DIi*  arnebeth, 
sujjposed  to  be  compounded  of  n"|K 
ardh,  to  crop,  and  ^^D  7iib,  the  produce 


100 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


7  And  the  swine,  though  he  divide  '  he  chewelh  not  the  cud;  clie  is 


the  hoof,  and  be  cloven-footed,  yet 


unclean  to  you. 

c  Isai.  G5.  4,  and  66. 


17. 


of  the  ground.  '  The  propriety  of  this  : 
denoiTiinalion  will  appear  from  the  de-  \ 
vastaiions  which  in  various  times  and 
countries  hares  are  recorded  to  have 
coiniiiilted.  The  reason  given  for  their  i 
reJL'clion  is,  that,  though  they  chew  the 
cud,  they  do  not  divide  the  hoof — that  ! 
is,  that  their  foot  has  loo  many  divi-  ! 
sions — an  undivided  hoof  and  a  foot  ' 
v.'ith  more  than  a  complete  division  into  ! 
two  parts  being  equally  rejected.  The 
statement  that  the  hare  does  chew  the 
cud  has  been  disputed  by  naturalists. 
Michaelis,  who  says  that  no  two  sports- 
men concur  in  giving  the  same  answer 
on  the  subject,  considers  it  one  of  those 
doubtful  cases,  which,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  camel's  foot,  the  legislator  was 
obliged  to  decide  authoritatively.  But 
the  poet  Cowper,  who  domesticated 
three  tame  hares,  and  studied  their  hab- 
its with  great  attention,  affirms  that 
'  they  cliewed  the  cud  all  day  till  even- 
ing,' thus  confirming  the  decision  of  the 
Hebrew  legislator.  The  use  of  the  have 
for  food  is  not  forbidden  to  Mohammed- 
ans in  their  Koran,  and  is  distinctly  al- 
lowed, by  the  example  of  Mohammed 
himself,  in  the  '  Mischal-ul-Masabiii,' 
but  the  Moslem  doctors  have  classed  its 
flesh  among  meats  which,  although  not 
legally  forbidden,  are  abominable.  Dr. 
Russell,  who  does  not  seem  to  be  aware 
of  this  fact,  in  his  '  Natural  History  of 
Aleppo,'  attributes  the  abstinence  of 
the  Turks  from  the  hare  merely  to  dis- 
like. It  is  however  remarkable,  that 
the  Bedouin  Arabs,  the  Eelauts  of  Per- 
sia, and  other  Mohammedan  nomades, 
who  in  general  pay  little  attention  to 
religion,  pursue  hares  with  great  eager- 
ness, and  eat  them  openly  without  the 
least  scruple.  The  animals  are  found 
in  considerable  numbers  in  the  deserts 
of  Western  Asia,  which  these  nomades 
inhabit,  or  through  which  they  fre- 
quently pass.    They  are  usually  dressed 


entire,  without  any  preparation  ;  being 
baked  in  a  hole  dug  in  the  ground  for 
the  purpose :  and  thus  cooked  are  re- 
lished by  all  nomades.' — Fict.  Bib. 

7.  The  swine.  Heb.  ^"^Tn  ^hazir. 
'  The  prohibition  of  the  hog  is  by  no 
means  peculiar  to  the  Hebrews.  All 
their  neighbors,  the  Egyptians,  the 
Arabs,  and  the  Phoenicians,  concurred 
in  disliking  the  hog,  and  interdicting  its 
use  The  principal  reason  for  the 
prohibition  was  probably  dietetical. 
It  was  a  remark  made  by  the  an- 
cient physicians,  and  confirmed  by  the 
modern,  that  persons  who  indulged 
in  pork  were  peculiarly  liable  to  le- 
prosy and  other  cutaneous  disorders. 
Michaelis  observes  on  this  subject, 
*  Whoever  is  afflicted  with  any  cutane- 
ous diseases  must  carefully  abstain 
from  swine's  flesh  if  he  wishes  to  re- 
cover. It  has  likewise  been  long  ago 
observed,  that  the  eating  of  swine's 
flesh  produces  a  peculiar  susceptibility 
of  itchy  disorders.  Now,  in  the  whide 
tract  of  country  in  which  Palestine  lies, 
something  more  to  the  south,  and  some- 
thing more  to  the  north,  the  leprosy  is 
an  endemic  disease :  in  Egypt  it  is 
peculiarly  common,  and  the  Israelites 
left  that  country  so  far  infected  with  it, 
that  Moses  was  obliged  to  make  many 
regulations  on  the  subject,  that  the 
contagion  might  be  weakened,  and  the 
people  tolerably  guarded  against  its 
influence.'  He  adds,  '  every  physician 
will  interdict  a  person  laboring  under 
any  cutaneous  disease  from  eating  pork  ; 
and  it  has  been  remarked  in  Germany, 
that  such  diseases  are  in  a  peculiar 
manner  to  be  met  with  in  those  places 
where  a  great  deal  of  pork  is  eaten.' 
Michaelis  also  observes,  that,  although 
pork  was  forbidden  as  food,  the  Hebrews 
were  not  forbidden  to  keep  swine  as 
articles  of  trade.  We  agree  that  they 
might  do  so,  but  that  they  actually  did 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XL 


101 


8  Of  their  flesh  shall  ye  not  eat, 
and  their  carcass  shall  ye  not  touch ; 
^  they  are  unclean  to  you. 

9  H  e  These  shall  ye  eat,  of  all 
that  are  in  the  waters :  whatsoever 
hath  fins  and  scales  in  tlie  waters, 
in  the  seas,  and  in  the  rivers,  them 
shall  ye  eat. 

10  And  all  that  have  not  fins  nor 
scales  ia  the  seas,  and  in  the  rivers, 
of  all  that  move  in  the  waters,  and 

d  Isai.  52.  n.  See  Matt.  15.  11,  20.  Mark 
7.  -2,  J 5,  13.  Acts  10.  14,  15,  and  15.  29. 
Rom.  14.  14,  17.  1  Cor.  8.  8.  Col.  2.  16,  21. 
Heb.  9.  10.     c  Deut.  14.  9. 


is  Hoi  very  likely,  when  the  neighboring 
ijuiions  were  equally  averse  to  pork 
with  themselves.  But  we  think  ihe 
extent  of  this  aversion  has  been  exag- 
gerated. The  Mohammedans  detest 
the  liog  quite  as  much  as  it  was  possi- 
ble for  the  Jews  to  do,  and  none  are 
kejjt  lor  any  purpose  by  them  ;  but  if 
ihf  y  encounter  a  wild  hog,  they  will 
capture  it  alive  or  dead,  and  carry  it, 
even  in  their  arms,  to  Christians,  either 
for  sale,  or  as  an  acceptable  present. 
Tl)e  only  pork  we  ever  tasted,  while 
residing  in  Mohammedan  Asia,  was 
(jrr)cured  in  this  manner  Irom  Moslems. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  law  to  prevent 
I  he  Jews  from  doing  the  same,  if  they 
knew  persons  by  whom  pork  might  be 
eaten.  Il  is  true,  that  if  they  touched 
an  animal  not  allowed  for  food,  they 
became  unclean  till  the  evening;  but 
this  was  equally  the  case  if  ihcy  touched 
a  human  corpse,  or  even  the  carcass  of 
an  animal  fit  for  food,  unless  it  had  been 
slaughtered  in  the  usual  way.  There 
was  nothing  to  prevent  them  from 
handling  hogs  or  any  other  unclean  ani- 
mals while  alive.' — FicL  Bib. 

Distinction  of  Fishes. 
9—1,2.  These  shall  ye  eat,  of  all  that 
are  in  the  iraters.  In  these  verses  the 
sacred  writer  lays  down  the  distinction 
that  was  to  be  m;Kle  in  regard  to  fishes. 
All  that  liave  scales  and  fins  were  to  be 
accounted  clean,  and  all  others  uncb  an 
9* 


of  any  living  thing  which  is  in  the 
waters,  they  shall  be  an  ^abomina- 
tion  unto  you : 

11  They  shall  be  even  an  abomi- 
nation unto  you  :  ye  shall  not  eat 
of  their  flesh,  but  ye  shall  have 
their  carcasses  in  abomination. 

12  Whatsoever  hath  no  fins  nor 
scales  in  the  waters,  that  shall  be 
an  abomination  unto  you. 

13  H  sAnd  these  are  they  which 
ye  shall  have  in  abomination  among 
the  fowls;  they  shall  not  be  eaten, 

f  ch.  7.  IS.    Deut.  14.  3.     S  Deut.  14.  12. 


— a  distinction  equally  clear,  simple, 
and  systematic.  Even  to  this  day  fish 
with  fins  and  scales  are  generally  re- 
garded as  wholesome  and  often  deli- 
cious, while  others  that  differ  in  these 
particulars  are  looked  upon  with  disgust, 
and  occasionally  with  horror,  under  a 
belief  that  they  are  sometimes  poison- 
ous. It  is  interesting  to  remark  how 
the  sentiments  of  mankind  do  generally, 
in  this  matter,  coincide  with  the  divine 
precept. 

Distinction  of  Fou-ls. 
13.  These  are  they  which  ye  shall 
have  in  abomination  among  the  fowls. 
Heb.  qii^n  p  min  hdoph,  of  the  fowl, 
collect,  singular.  The  ordinance  re- 
specting birds  differs  from  the  others  in 
the  absence  of  any  particular  distinc- 
tion of  clean  and  unclean.  It  merely 
specifies,  for  the  sake  of  prohibiting, 
certain  species  of  known  birds,  leaving 
it  to  be  understood  that  all  others  were 
allowed.  But  even  in  regard  to  the 
permitted  species,  it  is  now  so  difficult 
to  ascertain  them,  that  we  cannot  re- 
sist the  inference  that  the  Law  itself 
must  be  considered  as  abrogated  ;  for 
there  is  probably  not  a  Jew  in  existence 
who  is  able  to  identify  the  different 
classes  here  mentioned.  And  the  same 
remark  holds  good  in  respect  to  many 
of  the  animals  and  insects  designated 
in  this  chapter.  They  nmst  find  them- 
selves therefore   in  tlie  predicament  of 


102 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


they  are  an  abomination  :  the  eagle, 
and  the  ossifrago,  and  the  ospray, 


14  And  the  vulture,  and  the  kite 
after  his  kind : 


being  bound  to  abstain  from  eating  the 
flosh  and  coming  in  contact  with  the 
carcasses  of  various  orders  of  animals 
and  birds,  and  yet  perfectly  ignorant 
what  ihey  are,  and  not  knowing  but 
they  are  continually  breaking  the  law 

every  day  ! IT  The  eagle.     Heb.  T^D 

v.Lsher,  from  the  obsolete  root  *TJJD 
ndshar,  to  lacerate,  to  tear  in  pieces,  as 
the  eagle  with  its  talons  and  beak. 
The  Heb.  term,  however,  has  a  broader 
acceptation,  and  comprehends  also  a 
species  of  vulture,  especially  in  those 
passages  where  the  'MI^'2  ne'sher  is  said 
to  be  bald,  Mic.  1.  16,  and  to  feed  on 
carcasses,  Job.  39.  27,  Prov.  30.  17 
(Comp.  aiToi,  Mat.  24.  28.)  As  the 
character  and  habits  of  the  eagle,  the 
king  of  birds,  may  be  learned  in  detail 
from  the  common  works  on  natural  his- 
tory, the  reader  is  referred  to  them  for 
all  the  further  information  he  may  de- 
sire.    Comp.  Note  on  Dout.  32.  11. 

IT  The  ossifrage.  Heb.  T^S  pires,  from 
CIS  P'h'os,  to  crush,  or  break,  equiva- 
lent to  which  is  '  ossifrage,'  bone-break- 
er, in  our  version,  from  the  Lai  'os,' 
bo7ie,  and  '  frango,'  to  break.  Ti)is  is 
cue  of  the  most  difficult  to  be  identified 
of  all  the  birds  in  the  list.  The  Tar- 
gun)  of  Onkelos,  and  the  Sept.  and  Vulg. 
versions  read  it  '  vulture,'  in  which  the 
majority  of  versions  concur.  Others 
think  it  denotes  the  '  black  eagle,'  and 
some  the  '  falcon.'  Mr.  Kilto  decides 
in  favor  of  the  '  great  sea-eagle,'  a  bird 
about  the  size  of  the  golden  eagle,  and 
inhabiting  the  clifl's  and  promontories 
along  the  sea-shore.  It  is  spread  over 
the  northern  parts  of  Europe  and  Asia. 

IT   The  ospray.      Heb.  n^jTiy  oz- 

niy'ydh.  The  ospray,  or  fish-hauk 
{Pandion  haliactus,)  is  a  native  of 
both  continents.  The  upper  parts  of  its 
body  are  of  a  rich  glossy  brown  ;  the 
tail  barred  with  brown  of  different 
shades,  while  the  under  parts  are  white. 
It  subsists  entirely  upon  fish,  which  it 


seizes  by  darting  down  with  incredible 
velocity  upon  them.  Some  think  the 
black  eagle  is  here  intended  ;  but  the 
probabilities  are  at  least  equally  in 
favor  of  our  version. 

14.  The  vulture.  Heb.  nj^T  darth, 
with  the  import  oi  flying,  or  rather  of 
sailing  xcith  expanded  wings  through 
the  air,  and  in  Deul.  14.  13,  HS^^  rdah, 
with  that  of  seeing  ;  but  whether  from 
its  remarkable  powers  of  vision,  or  by 
an  easy  inlerchatige  of  the  similar  let- 
ters T  d  and  1  r,  is  uncertain.  The 
Chal.  here  follows  the  Heb.  giving  i<n^l 
daitha,  but  in  Deut.  14.  13,  it  renders  by 
t^533  f>'2  bath  kanpha,  daughter  of  the 
U'ing.  The  Gr.  renders  it  by  yii//,  and 
the  Lat.  Vulg.  by  '  Milvus,'  a  kite, 
which,  from  its  signification  when  used 
as  a  verb,  seems  to  be  very  appropriate. 
This  verb,  when  taken  in  its  full  appli- 
cation,  denotes  thai  kind  of  flight  which 
is  at  once  swift,  varied,  and  majestic. 
Hence  the  term  agrees  well  with  the 
kite,  or  glede,  which  is  characterized 
by  the  easy  and  sweeping  motion  with 
which  it  glides  through  the  air.  The 
kite  (Milvus  ict inns),  \hough  it  preys 
upon  the  lesser  animals,  does  not  scru- 
ple to  feed  upon  garbage,  and  therefore, 
in  Egypt,  it  is  often  seen  in  company 
with  the  vultures  when  at  their  neces- 
sary  and  useful  task  of  devouring  the 
carrion  and  offal  of  meat,  that  they 
may  not  pollute  the  air  by  decomposi- 
tion.  IT  The  kite.     Heb.  ri"'5*  ay  yah, 

rendered  in  Job,  2S.  7,  '  vulture,'  and 
that  very  properly.  '  This  is  a  splendid 
bird,  diffused  over  the  south  of  Europe, 
Turkey,  Persia,  and  Africa,  It  feeds 
on  putrid  flesh,  like  the  rest  of  the  fam- 
ily  ;  and  makes  its  nest  in  the  clefts  of 
the  rock,  irom  whence  it  can  survey  the 
distant  jilains,  and  n)ark  the  fallen  prey. 
In  length  it  is  about  three  feet  ^ix  inches, 
with  an  expanse  of  wings  reaching  to 
right  or  nine.  The  color  of  the  full- 
grown  bird  is  a  deep  rufous  gray,  be. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XL 


103 


15  Every  raven  after  his  kind; 

16  And  the  owl,  and  the  night- 
coming  bbck  on  the  quill-fealhers  and 
tail.  The  head  and  nock  are  not  entirely 
bare,  but  are  covered  wilh  a  short  close 
down,  and  the  beautiful  rufFis  of  a  pure 
white.  Travelers,  astonished  at  the  ex- 
traordinary distance  from  whicli  these 
birds  can  descry  a  carcass,  have  debated 
nhelher  they  were  guided  by  sight  or  by 
scent ;  but  llie  beautiful  and  picturesque 
accuracy  of  the  Book  of  Job,  on  many 
points  of  natural  history,  seem  here  to 
alFord  us  its  high  authority  in  ascribing 

it   to  the  eye.'— P/cf.  Bib. TT  After 

iii.s  kind.  Tliis  expression  is  doubtless 
used  here  for  the  purpose  of  including 
whatever  ditTerent  varieties  there  may 
chance  to  be  under  the  same  species. 
And  so  in  the  subsequent  verses. 

15.  The  raven.  Heb.  n*^:?  oreb, 
which,  from  its  etymology,  we  might 
translate  '  the  bird  of  night,'  an  appel- 
lation wliich  it  owed  to  the  tincture  of 
its  plumage,  whicli  was  dark,  like  the 
livery  ol'  night,  or  'Z'^y  ereb.  A  word 
of  the  same  origin  is  extended  by  the 
Arabian  writers  to  the  rook,  crow,  and 
jackdaw,  as  well  as  to  the  raven  :  in 
fact  it  seems  to  include  all  those  spe- 
cies which  are  by  Cuvier  ranged  under 
the  genus  Corvus.  The  predominant 
color  of  these  is  black,  hence  Ercb  (the 
origin  of  the  classic  Erebus),  im]dyi;ig 
a  sable  hue,  is  a  very  proper  word  as  a 
generic  appellation  corresponding  to 
Corvus. 

16.  The  owl.  Heb.  rrSI^H  ti'2  bath 
hayyonah,  daughter  of  the  yonah..  Tins 
bird  is  generally  agreed  to  be  the  *  os- 
trich,' and  to  be  so  called  horn  vocifera- 
tion, or  the  screeching,  mournful  noise 
which  it  makes,  and  which  is  implied 
in  the  original  word  HDI*^  yonah.  The 
;otnparatively  little  knowledge  of  natu- 
ral history  enjoyed  by  the  translators, 
must    account    for    their    rendering  it 

<owl.' TT    The    night-hawk.       Heb. 

S?2nn  tahmdg,  from  a  root  implying 
rapine  and  violence.     It  was  in  all  pro- 


hawk,  and  the  cuckoo,  and  the 
hawk  after  his  kind, 

bability  a  species  of  owl  (Lat.  Vulg. 
'  noctua,')  so  called  from  its  ravenous 
and  predatory  habits.  Its  scientific  de- 
signation is  the  '  Strix  Orientalis/  thus 
described  by  Hasselquisi :  •'  It  is  of  the 
bize  of  the  common  owl,  and  lodges  in 
the  large  buildings  or  ruins  of  Egypt 
and  Syria,  and  sometimes  even  in  the 
dwelling-houses.  The  Arabs  in  Egypt 
call  it '  Masasa,'  and  the  Syrians  '  Bana.' 
It  is  extremely  voracious  in  Syria,  to 
such  a  degree  that  if  the  windows  be 
left  open  in  the  evenings,  it  flies  into 
the  houses,  and  even  kills  infants,  un- 
less they  are  carefully  watched  ;  where- 
fore the  women  are  much  afraid  of  him. 

"JT  The   cuckoo.      Heb.  qn'J    sha 

'haph.  As  the  Greek  version  renders 
this  term  by  Xap^^v^  and  the  Vulgate  by 
larus,  we  are  led  to  suppose  that  some 
of  the  lesser  kinds  of  sea-fowl  are 
meant ;  and  from  the  nature  of  the 
original  word,  which  denotes  slender' 
ness  and  wasting,  one  would  feel  in- 
clined to  think  that  the  terns  must  be 
here  alluded  to.  The  terns  (Sterna) 
are  slender  birds,  and  resemble,  with 
their  long  wings  and  forked  tail,  the 
common  swallow  ;  whence  they  are 
called,  in  French  and  English,  '  sea- 
swallows.'  Some  writers  think  the 
sea-mew  is  intended  ;  but  Dr.  Shaw  in- 
clines to  the  saf-saf—lhe  name  of  which 
is  not  unlike  the  Hebrew  of  the  text. 
This  is  a  graminivorous  and  gregarious 
bird  ;  of  which  there  are  two  species 
described  by  the  Doctor  in  his  '  Travels,' 

p.  252. TT  The  hau-k.     Heb.  ^2  n'ttz^ 

from  n!rj=!SJ^3  natzCih,  to  fly,  supposed 
to  be  the  common  sparrow-hawk,  which 
abounds  over  the  old  continent,  and  has 
long  been  noted  for  the  celerity  of  its 
flight,  and  the  activity  with  which  it 
pursues  its  prey. 

17,  The  little  owl.  Heb.  CIIj  kds,  Gr. 
vvKTiKopa^.  This  was  perhaps  the  com- 
mon barn-owl,  well  known  in  nearly  all 
countrit's.      Our    ven^ion    gives    three 


104 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


17  And  the    little  owl,  and  the 
cormorant,  and  the  great  owl, 

owls  in  two  verses  ;  but  this  appears  to 
be  the  only  real  one.  Some  writers, 
however,  think  that  the  list  of  water- 
fowl begins  here,  and  that  the  sea-guU 

is    intended. IT    The     Cormorant. 

Heb.  "T^'O  shalak,  from  a  root  signify- 
ing to  throw,  cast,  or  dart  down,  and 
thence  well  applied  to  birds  which  dart 
down  with  great  velocity  upon  their 
prey.  Hence  the  Gr.  KarappaKrrn,  the 
cataract,  or  the  bird  w\i\oh  precipitates 
itself  upon  its  prey.     Chal.  J^3lDblD  sha- 

lenona,  fish-hunter. IT    The    great 

owl.  Heb.  w)Tr3'^  yansuph,  Gr.  iPis- 
The  sacred  Ibis,  so  celebrated  in  ancient 
story,  seems  lo  be  the  bird  intended — 
the  Ibis  rcligiosa  of  Cuvier.  This  bird 
was  embalmed  by  the  Egyptians  ;  and 
specimens  have  been  preserved  in  a 
state  of  such  perfection  that  not  only 
the  skeleton  but  the  feathers  might  be 
studied,  in  order- to  ascertain  its  iden- 
tity with  the  living  animal.  It  is  about 
the  size  of  a  common  fowl.  While 
young,  the  neck  is  partially  covered 
with  down,  or  minute  feathers,  which 
fall  off  when  the  plumage  is  complete. 
The  major  part  of  its  feathers  are  of  a 
clear  and  spotless  white.  The  head, 
bill,  neck,  and  legs  are  of  a  deep  black  ; 
as  are  also  the  tips  of  the  quill-feathers, 
with  a  violet  reflection.  The  last  four 
secondaries  are  of  the  same  tincture, 
and  by  their  length  and  silky  nature 
form  an  elegant  plume,  mantling  over 
the  hinder  parts  of  the  body. 

18.  The  swan.  Heb.  r?3r:n  tinshe- 
mcth.  The  Sept.  renders  this  by 
nop(pvpio}va.  the  purple  bird,  a  bird  very 
famous  among  the  ancients  for  the  beau- 
ty of  its  plumage,  which  is  indigo  min- 
gled with  red.  It  inhabits  marshy  sit- 
uations in  the  neighborhood  of  rivers 
and  lakes,  and  is  found  universally  in 
the  Levant  and  the  islands  of  the  Medit- 
erranean. Miciiaelis,  with  whom  Park- 
hurst  is  disposed  to  concur,  thinks  the 
goose   is   intended  ;    and   lienc^   infers 


18  And  the  swan,  and  the  pelicaD;^ 
and  the  gier-eagle, 


that  the  modern  Jews  transgress  their 
law  in  using  goose-fat,  in  lieu  of  other 
fat  or  of  butter,  in  their  culinary  pre- 
parations.  IT    The    pelican.      Heb. 

Tii^p  kaath.  As  the  root  nj^Jp  kaah 
signifies  to  vomit,  the  name  is  supposed 
very  probably  to  designate  the  '  pelican,' 
which  receives  its  food  into  the  pouch, 
under  the  lower  mandible  or  jaw,  and 
by  pressing  it  on  its  breast  with  its  bill, 
throws  it  up  for  the  nourishment  of  its 
young.  Hence  the  fable  which  repre- 
sents the  pelican  as  wounding  her  breast 
with  her  bill,  that  she  may  feed  her 
young  with  her  own  blood  ;  a  fiction 
which  has  no  foundation  but  in  the 
above  circumstance. — '  We  have  often 
seen  one  of  the  species  silling  on  the 
ledge  of  a  rock,  a  fool  or  two  above  the 
surface  of  the  water,  in  pensive  silence 
during  the  whole  day  ;  the  continuity 
of  its  proceeding  being  only  interrupted 
at  distant  intervals  by  the  near  approach 
of  some  unlucky  fish,  upon  which  it 
darted  with  unerring  certainty,  and  then 
resumed  its  wonted  stillness.  At  other 
limes  we  have  observed  them  urging 
their  way,  with  rapid  flight,  thirty  or 
forty  miles  into  the  country,  after  a 
day's  fishing,  lo  feast  in  the  lonely  wil- 
derness upon  the  contents  of  their  well- 
stored  pouches  :  and  were  then  reminded 
of  ihe  words,  '  I  am  like  a  pelican  in  the 
wilderness.' — Pict.Bib. II  The  gier- 
eagle.  Heb.  tm  raUiam.  By  this 
term  the  Sept.  understands  the  kvkvos, 
the  swan  ;  but  as  the  root  signifies  ten- 
derness and  affection,  it  is  obviously 
intended  to  point  out  some  bird  noted 
for  its  attachment  to  ils  young.  This 
applies  very  well  to  the  '  swan,'  which, 
notwithstanding  its  meek  and  inofien- 
sive  disposition  will,  in  defence  of  its 
young,  give  battle  to  the  larger  animals, 
and  even  to  man  himself. 

19.  The  stork.  Heb.  nT^DH  'hasidah, 
from  "iDn  'hasad,  which  signifies  to  be 
full,  abundant,  exuberant  in  goodnes.i^ 


B,  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XL 


105 


19  And  the  stork,  the  heron  after 


kindness,  affection. — '  The  bird  is  an 
inhabitant  of  the  warmer  regions,  but 
often  migrates  to  higher  latitudes  to  lay 
its  eggs  and  hatch  its  young.  It  is  psr- 
ticularly  abundant  in  Egypt  and  the 
western  parts  of  Asia,  and  is  also  well 
known  in  ditTtrent  parts  of  Europe  ; 
and,  wherever  found,  its  amiable  and 
contiding  disposition  has  secured  it  the 
protection  and  esteem  of  man.  No  bird 
is  mtire  lamous  for  its  attachment  to  its 
young  ;  and,  which  is  more  rare  among 
birds,  for  its  kindness  to  the  old  and 
feeble  of  its  own  race.  It  has  also 
acquired  a  sort  of  sanctity  in  different 
countries,  not  less  perhaps  from  its 
grave  and  contemplative  appearance 
than  for  its  predilection  for  churches, 
mosques,  and  temples,  on  the  roofs  or 
towers  of  which — perhaps  because  tiiey 
are  in  general  tiie  loftiest  buildings — it 
usually  prefers  to  establish  its  large 
and  well-compacted  nest.  It  also  builds 
on  the  roofs  of  private  houses  ;  and,  in 
the  East,  on  the  wind-chimneys  by 
which  apartments  are  ventilated.  This 
habit  brings  it  into  close  connexion 
with  man  in  Turkey  and  Persia  ;  in 
most  parts  of  which  countries  people 
sleep  at  night  on  the  flat  roofs  of  their 
houses,  and  sometimes  sit  and  amuse 
themselves  there  in  the  cool  of  the  even- 
ing. The  storks,  although  th.en  full  in 
view,  and  themselves  observant  of  all 
tlmt  passes,  do  not  on  any  occasion  ex- 
hibit alarm  or  apprehension.  This  may 
as  well  be  a  consequence  as  a  cause  of 
the  peculiar  favor  with  which  they  are 
regarded.  But  certain  it  is,  that  in 
Turkey,  Persia,  Egypt,  or  indeed  in 
any  place,  even  in  Europe,  to  which 
these  birds  resort,  a  man  would  be  uni- 
versally execrated  who  should  molest  a 
stork,  or  even  disturb  its  nest  during  its 
absence.  In  some  cases  the  law  ex- 
pressly provides  for  its  protection.  It 
was  exactly  the  same  among  ancient 
nations,  the  laws  in  some  of   which 


her  kind,  and  the  lapwing,  and  the 
bat. 


made  it  highly  penal  to  kill  a  stork. 
It  often  appeared  to  us  as  if  the  Orien- 
tals  in  general  regarded  the  stork  as  a 
I  sort  of  household  god,  whose  presence 
brought  a  blessing  upon  the  house  on 
which  it  established  its  nest.  They 
also  do  not  overlook  the  importance  of 
its  services  in  clearing  the  land  of  ser- 
pents and  other  noxious  reptiles,  which 
form  part  of  its  food.  Whether  the  law 
of  Moses  prohibited  the  stork  as  food, 
in  order  to  protect  its  existenee,  or  be- 
cause the  nature  of  its  food  rendered  it 
unclean,  it  is  impossible  to  determine  : 
perhaps  both  reasons  operated.'— P.  Bib. 

IT  The  heron.    Heh.  nt^Z^  andphiih. 

'  This  bird  is  only  mentioned  here  and 
in  Deut.  14. 18  ;  and  as  in  both  places  it 
is  only  named  without  the  mention  of 
any  characterizing  circumstance,  very 
ample  latitude  has  been  allowed  to  con- 
jecture in  all  attempts  to  determine 
tlie  species.  The  crane,  the  curlew, 
the  woodcock,  the  peacock,  the  kite, 
the  parrot,  and  the  mountain  falcon, 
have  had  their  several  claims  advocated. 
The  root  anaph  signifies  to  breathe 
short  through  the  nostrils,  to  snort  as 
in  anger,  and  lience,  to  be  angry  •  and 
this  has  led  to  the  conclusion  that  a 
bird  of  angry  dispositions  must  be  in- 
tended. It  seems  to  us  so  hopeless  to 
identify  the  bird  in  this  way,  that  we 
have  no  desire  to  disturb  the  common 
reading  which  has  as  much  and  as  little 
probability  as  any  other.  The  disposi- 
tions of  the  heron  are  sufficiently  irri- 
table to  satisfy  those  who  rest  upon  the 
etymology  of  the  name.  The  bird  is 
allied  to  the  stork,  and,  like  it,  feeds 
on  fish  and  reptiles,  and  is  noted  for  its 
voracious  appetite.  The  heron  is  found 
in  most  countries  :  in  England  it  was 
formerly  held  in  high  estimation,  its 
flesh  being  counted  a  great  delicacy, 
and  bore  a  price  equal  to  that  of  the 
pheasant    and  curlew.     Heronhawking 


106 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


20  All  fowls  that  creep,  going 
upon  all  four,  shall  be  an  abomina- 
tion unto  you. 

21  Yet  these  may  ye  eat,  of  every 
flying  creeping  thing  that  goeth 
upon  all  iour,  Avhich  have  legs 
above  tiieir  feel,  to  leap  withal 
upon  the  earth ; 

and  nobles  ;  on  which  account  laws 
were  enacted  for  the  preservation  of  the 
species.  A  person  destroying  their  eggs 
was  Hable  to  the  then  heavy  fine  of 
twenty  shillings  for  each  egg.  These 
birds  are  gregarious  in  the  breeding 
season,  and  make  their  nests  very  near 
each  other.  They  niaj^  be  tamed  when 
taken  young  :  llie  ancient  Egyptians  | 
used  to  keep  them  tame — apparently 
to  assist  in  fishing  ;  and  ^han  reports, 
that  they  so  well  understood  the  human 
voice  as  to  become  exceedingly  angry  ^ 
when  any  person  abused  them  or  charg- 
ed them  with  laziness.  If  this  was  true 
at  the  time  of  the  exodus,  tha  bird  must 
have  been  familiarly  known  to  the  Is- 
raelites, and  the  probability  is  thus 
strengthened  that  the  heron  is  really 
intended.'— P/c/.  Bib. ^  The  lap- 
wing. Heb.  fS'^jll  dukiphath.  Gr. 
cTui//,  upupa.  We  may  conclude  this 
to  be  the  hoopoe,  which  is  often  met 
with  in  the  writings  of  antiquity  ;  it  is 
an  elegant  and  animated  bird,  its  head 
being  surmounted  with  a  beautiful  crest 
of  plumes,  which  by  their  varying  mo- 
tion seem  to  express  the  feelings  of  the 
wearer.  It  is  spread  over  all  the  warmer 
regions  of  the  old  continent,  and  occa- 
sionally visits  this  country.  It  is  about 
twelve  inches  long,  with  a  fawn-colored 
plumage,  barred  with  black  and  while 
on  the  wings  and  lower  parts  of  the 
back.  Tail  black,  with  a  crescent  of 
white  at  the  base.  Its  food  consists  of 
insects,  worms,  and  snails,  and  it  was 
perhaps  on   this  account   forbidden  as 

an  article  of  diet. IT  The  bat.     Heb. 

tl^'ZV  atalll'ph,  so  called  according  to 
most  lexicographers  from  two  words 
implyingjftiers  in  darkness.     As  Mo- 


22  Even  these  of  them  ye  may 
eat ;  ^  the  locust  after  his  kind,  and 
the  bald  locust  after  his  kind,  and 
the  beetle  after  his  kind,  and  the 
grasshopper  after  his  kind. 

23  But  all  other  Hying  creeping 

h  Matt.  3.  4.    Mark  1.  6. 

ses  begins  his  catalogue  with  the  Eagle, 
the  highest  and  noblest  of  the  feathered 
race,  so  he  ends  with  the  Bat,  which  is 
the  lowest,  and  forms  the  connecting 
link  between  the  quadruped  and  vola- 
tile species. 

Distinction  of  Insects. 

20.  All  fouls  that  creep.  That  in- 
sects are  here  meant  is  plain  from  the 
following  verse,  and  therefore  the  sense 
is,  all  those  creatures  which  fly  and 
also  creep, '  going  upon  all  four,'  i.  e. 
creeping  along  upon  their  feet  in  the 
manner  of  quadrupeds,  such  as  flies, 
wasps,  bees,  &c.,  together  with  all 
leaping  insects  ;  these  are  to  be  avoided 
as  unclean,  with  the  exceptions  in  the 
two  next  verses. 

21.  V/hich  have  legs  above  their  feet 
to  leap  withal  vpon  the  earth.  Insects, 
reptiles,  and  worms,  are  generally  pro- 
hibited ;  but  a  previous  exception  is 
here  made  in  favor  of  those  insects, 
which  besides  four  walking  legs,  have 
also  two  longer  springing  legs  (pedes 
saltatorii)  and  which,  under  the  naine 
of '  locusts,'  are  declared  clean.  Those 
particularly  enumerated  seem  to  indi 
cate  the  four  leading  genera  of  the 
locust  family,  of  which  the  domestic 
cricket,  the  mole-cricket,  the  green 
grasshopper,  and  the  locust  may  be 
taken  as  representatives. 

22.  The  beetle.  Heb.  t'5^D  solcim. 
As  this  insect  is  never  eaten,  a  sort  of 
grasshopper  or  locust  is  pro'bably  in- 
tended ;  as  it  is  likely  thai  either  four 
species,  or  four  difierenl  stages  of  the 
same  insect,  are  intended  by  tlie  four 
names  in  this  verse.  In  Palestine,  Ara« 
bia,  and  the  adjoining  countries,  locusts 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER 

shall 


:i. 


107 


things,  which  have  four  feet 
be  an  abomination  unto  you. 

24  And  for  these  ye  shall  be  un- 
clean :  whosoever  toucheth  the 
carcass  of  them  shall  be  unclean 
until  the  even. 

25  And  whosoever  beareth  aught 
of  the  carcass  of  them  i  shall  wash 


his  clothes,  and  be  unclean  until 
the  even. 
26  The  carcasses  of  every  beast 
which  divideth  the  hoof  and  is  not 
cloven-footed,  nor  cheweth  the  cud, 
are  unclean  unto  you:  every  one 

an<l  15.  6,     Numb.  19.  10,  22, 


i  ch.  14.  { 
and  31.  24. 


are  one  of  the  coma»on  arlicles  of  food, 
yiid  the  people  would  be  very  ill  off  if 
jKccluded  from  eating  ihem.     When  a 
swarm  of  lliem  desolates  the  fields,  they 
prove,  in  some  measure,  theniselvts  an 
untidole  to  the  famine  which  ihey  occa- 
sion ;  so  much  so,  indeed,  that  the  poor 
people  iooU  forward  with  anxiety  to  the 
arrival  of  a  swarm  of  locusts,  as  yield- 
ing them  sustenance  without  any  trouble. 
*  They  collect  them  in  great  quantities, 
not  only  for  their  own  eating,  but  for 
sale  in   the  b;izaars — for  these  insects 
are   highly  relished  by  all   classes  of 
people.     In  some  towns  there  are  shops 
exclusively   for    the    sale    of   locusts, 
riiey  are  so  prepared  as  to  be  kept  for 
use   a   considerable  time.      There   are 
different  processes  ;  but  the  most  usual 
in  Western  Asia  is  to  throw  them  alive 
into  a  pot  of  boiling  water,  mixed  with 
a  good  quantity  of  salt.     After  boiling 
a  few  minutes  they  are  taken  out,  and 
the  heads,  feel,  and  wings  being  pluck- 
ed  off,  the  trunks  are  thoroughly  dried 
in  the  sun,  and   then   stowed   away  in 
sacks.     They  are  usually  sold  in  this 
condition,  and  are  either  eaten  without 
further  preparation,  or  else  are  broiled, 
i)r  stewed,  or  fried  in  butler.     They  are 
very  commonly  mixed  with  butter,  and 
80  spread  on  thin  cakes  of  bread,  and 
thus   eaten,  particularly  at   breakfast. 
Europeans  have  usually  an  aversion  to 
the  eating  of  these  insects,  from  being 
unaccustomed  to  them;  and  we  must 
confess  that  we  did  not   ourselves  re- 
ceive  ll:?m  at  first  without  some  repug- 
nance :  but,  separately  from  the  ques- 
tion of  us:ige,  they  are  not  more  repul- 
sive than  slirimps  or  })rawns,  to  which 
they   do,   indeed,   in    taste  and    ether 


qualities,  bear  a  greater  resemblance 
than  to  any  other  article  of  food  to 
which  we  are  accustomed. — The  Israel- 
ites being  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai 
when  they  received  this  law,  it  is  a 
rather  remarkable  fact  that  Burckhardt 
describes  the  present  inhabitants  of 
that  penin!?ula  as  the  only  Bedouins 
known  to  him  who  do  not  use  the  locust 
as  an  article  of  food.' — Plct.  Bib. 

23.  Shall  be  an  abomination  to  you. 
A  thing  to  be  loathed  and  abominated 
as  being  unclean  by  the  ceremonial  law. 
All  insects  appear  to  be  included  in  this 
prohibition  except  the  locvstcs.  With 
the  exception  of  these,  few,  if  any,  of 
the  tribe  of  insects,  properly  so  called, 
have  ever  constituted  an  article  of  hu- 
man food. 


Defilement  from  unclean  Carcasses. 
24.  For  these  ye  shall  be  unclean. 
That  is,  those  which  follow,  says  Ains- 
worth  ;  and  so  Michaelis  and  most 
others  understand  it ;  confining  the  un- 
cleanness  to  the  dead  bodies  only  of  the 
beasts  and  reptiles  after  mentioned 
Indeed  if  it  were  extended  to  the  insect 
tribes  mentioned  v.  20-23,  it  would 
scarcely  seem  possible  to  have  remained 
clean  a  single  hour.  But  whoever  ate 
any  of  the  interdicted  animals,  or  of  the 
forbidden  fowls  or  fishes,  or  came  ia 
contact  with  their  dead  carcasses,  con- 
tracted thereby  a  legal  uncleanness  for 
that  day  ;  nor  was  he  to  om  admitted 
to  the  worship  of  the  sanctuary,  nor  to 
have  intercourse  with  those  who  were, 
till  he  had  purified  himself  by  washing 
his  clothes  and  his  body,  which  he  was 
to  do  forthwith. 
27.  IVkatsoecer  goetk  upon  his  paws. 


108 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490 


that  toucheth  them  shall  be  un- 
clean. 

27  And  whatsoever  goelh  upon 
his  paws,  among  all  manner  of 
beasts  that  go  on  all  four,  those 
are  unclean  unto  you  :  whoso 
toucheih  their  carcass  shall  be  un- 
clean until  the  even. 

28  And  he  that  beareth  the  car- 
cass of  them  shall  wash  his  clothes, 


j  and   be   unclean   until   the  even 

they  are  unclean  unto  you. 
I  29  ^  These  also  shall  be  unclean 
1  unto  you  among  the  creeping  things 
:  that  creep  upon  the  earth ;  the 
weasel,  and  kthe  mouse,  and  the 
'  tortoise  after  his  kind, 

30  And  the  ferret,  and  the  chame- 
leon, and  the  lizard,  and  the  snail, 
and  the  moie. 

k  Isai.  66.  17. 


Heb.  1"^s:1j  ^5  al  kappauv,  upon  his 
palms  ;  referring  to  those  animals 
whose  feet  have  a  kind  of  resemblance 
to  the  human  hand,  such  as  lions, bears, 
dogs,  cats,  apes,  monkeys,  &c. 

Distinction  of  the  creeping  things. 

29.  Among  the  creeping  things  that 
creep  upon  the  earth.  That  is,  those 
which  have  legs  so  short  that  they 
creep,  as  it  were,  with  their  bellies  upon 
the  ground,  as  the  mole,  the  fiekl-mouse, 

and  the  lizard  tribe. IT  The  weasel. 

Heb.  n^n  ^holed,  from  the  Sj-riac  n^n 
'halad,  to  creep  in.  The  Septuogint 
and  the  Vulgate  agree  in  rendering  this 
word  by  '  weasel,'  though  it  is  difficult 
to  see  on  what  grounds  ihe'y  should 
have  classified  the  weasel  among  rep- 
tiles. The  opinion  of  Bochart  is  far 
preferable,  who  understands  by  the  "^n 
^holed,  the  mole,  wiiose  property  o[ dig- 
ging  into   the   earth,    and   burrowing 

under  its  surface  is  well  known. 

IT  The  mouse.  Heb,  '^DiS'  akbdr.  Gr. 
nvg.  '  There  seems  good  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  the  mouse  of  Scripture  was 
the  Dipus  sagitta  or  Jerboa^  an  animal 
about  the  size  of  a  large  rat,  and  char- 
acterized by  the  dis^proporlionate  short- 
ness of  the  fore-feet.  Its  color  is  a  pale 
tawny-yellov.^,  lighter  on  the  under 
parts  ;  the  long  tail  is  terminated  by  a 
tuft  of  black  hair.  Tlie  brevity  of  their 
fore-feet  is  compensated  by  the  f-ize  and 
strength  of  the  tail,  by  which,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  kangaroo,  they  are  enabled 
to  balance  themselves  in  an  upright  po- 
sition.    The  form  of  the  head  and  the 


expansion  of  the  ears  impress  them  with 
some  resemblance  to  the  rabbit.  They 
are  very  abundant  in  Egypt,  Syria,  and 
the  north  of  Africa,  and  burrow  in  the 
sand  or  among  ruins.  Their  flesh, 
though  eaten  by  the  natives  of  the  East, 
is  unsavory,  and  hence  the  interdiction, 
which  forbade  them  as  food,  did  not  lay 
the  necessity  of  much  sell-denial  upon 
the  Israelites.  As  this  animal  feeds 
exclusively  on  vegetable  produce,  a 
multiplication  of  its  numbers  could  not 
fail  to  be  highly  injurious  to  cultiva- 
tion.'—Pfc?.   Bib. IT   The    tortoise, 

Heb.  H^  tzab.     Gr.  kookocuXoSj  y^EOaaioi;, 

crocodilus.  Some  member  of  the  fam- 
ily of  lizards  is  undoubtedly  intended 
by  this  term,  but  the  precise  variety  it 
is  difficult  to  determine.  J.irchi  says 
it  is  a  creature  '  like  a  frog,'  and  nearer 
to  the  truth  we  have  no  means  of  cori>iiig. 

IT  After  his  kind.    Gr.  ra  bixoia  avry, 

things  like  unto  it. 

30.  The  ferret.  Heb.  np'I*  andkah, 
from  p;j4  (Inak,  to  groan,  to  cry  out  ; 
a  species  of  lizard,  deriving  its  name 
from  its  piercing,  doleful  cry.  Such  a 
description  of  this  animal  is  found  in 
countries  bordering  on  the  Mediterra- 
nean, of  a  reddish  gray  color,  spoiled 
with  brown.  It  is  thought  at  Cairo  to 
poison  the  victuals  over  which  it  passes, 
and  especially  salt  provisions,  of  which 
it  is  very  fond.  It  has  a  voice  some- 
what resembling  that  of  a  frog,  as  is 
intimated  by  its  Hebrew  name.— - 
IT  The  chameleon.  Heb.  mS  koa'h.  Gr. 
^  ijjai^euv.  Here  again  we  are  at  a  loss 
to  identify  the  creature  called  a  '  cha« 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XI. 


31  These  are  unclean  to  you 
among  all  that  creep:  whosoever 
doth  touch  them,  when  they  be 
dead,  stjall  be  unclean  until  the 
even. 

32  And  upon  whatsoever  any  of 
them,  when   they  are  dead,  doth 


nioleoii  ;'  and  as  we  are  not  likely  to 
oblaiii  any  thing  nnore  certain,  we  may 
state  the  opinion  of  Kitto,  who  con- 
f-iderss  it  a  species  of  lizard,  found  in 
Arabia,  Nuhia,  and  Abyssinia,  remark- 
able for  the  readiness  with  which  it 
forces  its  way  into  the  sand  when  pur- 
sued— an  evidence  of  the  strength  and 
activity  implied  in  its  Hebrew  name, 

which     signifies    force,    prowess. 

IT  Tlie  lizard.  Heb.  Hi^ub  letduh. 
The  original  word  signifies  to  adhere, 
and  therefore  may  apply  to  a  frightful 
and  venomous  species  of  lizard,  well 
known  in  the  East,  covered  with  tuber- 
cles, and  of  a  grey  color.  It  lives  in 
holes  of  the  walls,  and  under  stones, 
and  covers  itself  with  dirt,  which  is 
perhaps   alluded   to    by   the   sense   of 

adhering  conveyed    in   the  name. 

IT  The  snail.  Heb.  t:>2n  -hornet.  This 
word  in  Chaldee  signifies  to  bow  down. 
It  therefore  suggests  ihe  Lacertastellio, 
v.'hich  is  noted  for  bowing  its  head,  in- 
somuch that  the  followers  of  Moham- 
mcd  kill  it,  because  they  say  it  mimics 
them  in  the  mode  of  repeating  their 
prayers.  It  is  about  a  foot  in  length, 
and  of  an  olive  color  shaded  with  black. 

IT  The  mole.     Heb.  n^IL^DD  tinshe- 

meth,  from  C'lL'D  nusham,  to  breathe. 
We  may  therefore  with  much  proba- 
bility adopt  the  opinion  of  Bochart,  and 
apply  it  to  the  chameleon,  which  has 
lungs  of  such  vast  dimensions,  that, 
when  filled,  the  body  is  so  much  dilated 
as  to  appear  transparent.  The  varying 
capacity  of  tlieir  lungs  enables  ihem, 
by  exposing  a  greater  or  less  portion  of 
blood  to  the  influence  of  the  air,  to  alter 
the  tincture  of  the  circulating  fluid  at 
pleasure,  which  when  sent  to  the  sur. 
10 


fall,  it  shall  be  unclean ;  whether 
it  be  any  vessel  of  wood,  or  raiment, 
or  skin,  or  sack,  whatsoever  vessel 
it  be,  wherein  any  work  is  done, 
lit  must  be  put  into  water,  and  it 
shall  be  tmclean  until  the  even; 
so  it  shall  be  cleansed. 

1  ch.  15,  12. 

face  must  tend  to  give  a  color  more  or 
less  vivid  to  the  skin.  The  chameleon, 
or  Lacerta  Africana,  is  a  native  of 
Egypt,  Barbary,  and  of  the  south  of 
Spain. 

32.   Upon   whatsoever  any   of  them, 
when  they  are  dead,  doth  fall,  it  shall 
be  unclean.     That   is,  it  might  not  be 
used  till  it  was  cleansed.     Tliis,  how- 
ever, was  to  hold  only  in  regard  to  cer- 
tain kinds  of  vessels  specified   in   this 
verse,   viz.  either   such   as  were   very 
solid,  and  would  not  imbibe  a  scent  so 
as  to  retain  it  for  a  long  time,  or  such 
as  were  of  great  value,  and  could  not 
easily  be  replaced.     Others  of  a  diifer- 
ent  description,  such,  for  instance,  as 
were  very  porous,  or  earthen  vessels  of 
little  value,  were  to  be  broken  to  pieces, 
and  thrown  away.     '  The  great  incon- 
veniences which  the  law  connected  with 
this  and  other  defilements,  necessarily 
obliged  the  Israelites  to  pay  great  at- 
tention   to  cleanliness  :    and   this   was 
probably  what  the  laws  on  this  subject 
had  principally  in  view.     The  import- 
ance of  regulations  on  such  points  are 
not  so  fully  appreciated  in  this  country 
as  in  the  East,  where  all  kinds  of  rep- 
1  tiles,  many  of  them  poisonous,  find  their 
way  into  the  most  private  apartments 
I  and    conceal   themselves    in    recesses, 
I  crevices,  vessels,  and  boxes.     Experi- 
I  ence   taught   the   writer  of  this  note, 
while  in  the  East,  to  observe  the  great- 
j  est  caution  in  examining  a  box  or  ves- 
sel, which  had  not  very  recently  been 
;  disturbed,  lest  a  scorpion,  or  other  nox- 
j  ious  reptile,  might  be  concealed  within 
I  it.     On  this  subject,  Micliaelis  observes 
I  that   this   law  was   well  calculated  to 
prevent  accidents  from  poisoning:  'Of 


no 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


33  And  every  earthen  vessel, 
wliereinto  any  of  ihem  fallelh, 
whaisoever  is  in  it  shall  be  un- 
clean; and  mye  shall  break  it. 

34  Of  all  meat  which  may  be 
eaten,  that  on  which  such  water 
Cometh  shall  be  unclean:  and  all 
drink  that  may  be  drunk  in  every 
such  vesssel,  shall  be  Uiiclean. 

35  And  every  Ihing  whereupon 
amj  part  of  their  carcass  fiillelh, 

Ki  ch.  6.  28,  iind  15.  12. 

the  poisoiiitig  of  UquDrs  by  toads  creep- 
ing ialo  cabks  we  oflen  read  ;  and  Has- 
selquist  relates  an  instance  where  the 
poison  of  a  Gecko  in  a  cheese  had 
nearl}'  proved  fatal.  Mice  and  rats 
likewise  sometimes  poison  meat  that  is 
uncovered,  by  means  of  the  poison  laid 
for  themselves  being  vomited  upon  it. 
I  remembtr  the  case  of  a  brewing  of 
beer,  which,  to  all  the  people  of  a  town 
who  had  drunk  it,  occasioned  most  vio- 
lent agonies  ;  and  in  regard  to  which, 
aliliongh  it  was  most  peremjnorily  de- 
nied by  liie  magistrates  and  the  brewers, 
there  appeared  perfectly  good  reason 
for  believing  that  arsenic  had  in  this 
manner  got  among  the  malt.'  ' — P.  Bib. 
3-1.  Of  all  meat  xchich  may  he  eaten, 
&c.  The  meaning  undoubtedly  is,  tha-t 
any  meat  which  might  otherwise  be 
lawfully  eaten,  was  made  unclean  if 
water  poured  out  of  any  of  the  vessels 
named  above  was  to  come  upon  it.  For 
the  water  coming  out  of  a  defiled  vessel 
was  thereby  ils^elf  defiled,  and  commu- 
nicated defilement  to  the  meat  on  which 
it  fell.  On  the  same  principle,  all  drink 
that  might  be  drunk  from  any  such  ves- 
sel was  also  unclean  and  defiling. 

35.  Whether  it  be  ove7i,  or  ranges  for 
pots.  Heb.  D'^"l"'3  kirayim.  By  this 
is  probably  meant  a  kind  ol"  hearth  made 
of  stones,  where  fires  were  made  for 
boiling  their  pots  or  kellles.  The  ovens, 
on  the  other  hand,  were  the  contrivances 
for  baking  bread. 

36.  Nevertheless,  a  fountain  or  pit, 
wherein  there  is  plenty  of  water,  shall 


shall  be  unclean  ;  whether  it  be 
oven,  or  ranges  for  pots,  they  shall 
be  broken  down  :  fur  they  are  un- 
clean, and  shall  be  unclean  unto 
you. 

36  Nevertheless,  a  fountain  or  pit, 
wherein  there  is  plenty  of  water, 
shall  be  clean  :  but  that  which 
toucheth  their  carcass  shall  be  un- 
clean. 

37  And  if  amj  part  of  their  car- 
cass   fall   upon    any    sowing-seed 

be  clean.     Heb.  tj-?a  nip?2  ll^l  V^'^ 
mayaun  u-bor  viikvLk  rnayim,  a  foun- 
tain  or  a  pit,  a  gathering  of  waters. 
It  is  uncertain  wheiher  the  •  galliering 
of  waters  '  is  intended  to  be  understood 
of  something  distinct  from  the  fonniaiu 
or  pit  mentioned  before,  or  whether  it 
j  is   merely   exegetical   of  those  terms. 
[  To  us  it  seems  more  probable  thai  it 
;  refers   to  pools,   ponds,  or  lakes,  and 
'  such   like   collections  of  waters.     Ac- 
:  cordingly  the  Gr.  renders  it  with  an  in- 
terjected   '  and  '     before    '  gathering.' 
Tliis  will  periiapsbe  more  obvious  when 
we  consider  the  kind  and  mercilul  drift 
of  the   provision.     This  was  to  aflford 
the   means  of   the   speediest    possible 
cleansing  from  the  pollutions  which  any 
one  might  ha,ve  contracted.     For  this 
I  end  they  were  allowed  to  have  recourse 
,  to  any  collection  of  waters,  whether  in 
:  pools,  cisterns,  or  ponds,  even  although 
an  unclean  carcass  might  have  fallen 
into  it,  or  an  unclean  person  may  have 
'  just  washed  himself  in  it.     Considering 
!  tlie  scarcity  of  water   in  that  country, 
I  if  it  had  not  been  for  such  an  allowance 
I  as  this,  it  might  have  been  extremely 
I  difiicult  for  them  to  have  performed  the 
requisite    ablutions  after    their  defile- 

ments. IT  But  that  which  toucheth 

their  carcass.  R.aiher,  *  whosoever 
toucheth,'  referring  to  persons  who 
drew  out  the  carcass,  instead  of  the  in- 
j  strument  emjiloyed  for  that  purpose, 
I  as  others  understand  it.  So  the  Gr. 
1  6  rtffro^ti'Of,  he  that  toucheth. 
1     Zl.. Fall  upon  any  sowing-seed,    Ths 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XI. 


Ill 


which  is  to  be  so\yn,  it  shall  be 
clean. 

38  But  if  any  water  be  put  upon 
the  seed,  and  any  part  of  their  car- 
cass fall  ihereoa,  it  shall  be  unclean 
unto  you. 

39  And  if  any  beast,  of  which  ye 
may  eat, die;  he  that  toucheili  the 
carcass  thereof  shall  be  unclean 
until  the  even. 

40  And  "  he  that  eateth  of  the 
carcass  of  it  shall  wash  his  clothes, 
and  be  unclean  until  the  even;  he 
also  that  beareth  the  carcass  of  it 
shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  be  un- 
clean until  the  even. 

n  ch.  17.  15,  and  22.  8.  Deut.  14.  21. 
E7.ek.  4.  14,  and  44.  31. 


41  And  every  creeping  thing  that 
creepeth  upon  the  earth  shall  be 
an  abomination ;  it  shall  not  be 
eaten. 

4.2  Whatsoever  goet'i  upon  the 
belly,  and  whatsoever  goeih  upon 
all  four,  or  whatsoever  hath  more 
feet  among  all  creeping  things  that 
creep  upon  the  earth,  them  ye 
shall  not  eat ;  for  they  are  an 
abomination. 

43  o  Ye  shall  not  make  yourselves 
abominable  with  any  creeping 
thing  that  creepeth,  neither  shall 
ye  make  yourselves  unclean  with 
them,  that  ye  should  be  defiled 
thereby. 

o  cli.  20.  25. 


siime  exception  extended  lo  the  grain 
prepared  lor  sowing.  If  a  mouse,  for 
itiblaiice,  were  found  dead  among  a 
quantity  of  wheat,  designed  for  sowing, 
il  might  still  be  used  for  thai  purpose. 
But  other  wheat,  not  intended  for  sow- 
ing, thus  made  unclean,  might  not  be 
used,  till  il  was  cleansed  by  washing. 
In  the  case  of  the  seed  lo  be  sown,  il 
would  of  course  pass  through  so  many 
changes  of  slate  before  il  coiikl  become 
fond,  that  the  pollution  mighl  be  sup- 
posed to  be  taken  away  of  course. 

38.  But  if  any  waier  be  put  upon  the 
seed.  Wei  seed  mighl  be  supposed  lo 
liave  received  some  tincture  from  the 
carcass  which  dry  did  not ;  and  not 
being  in  a  fit  co-.idition  to  be  sown  till 
il  was  dry,  il  was  in  the  mean  lime  to 
be  cleansed.  Others,  however,  suppose 
the  allusion  here  is  not  lo  seed-corn,  but 
to  such  as  was  prepared  for  present 
food  ;  and  this  sense  is  perhjps  counte- 
nanced by  ihe  original,  which  has  'seed' 
in  general,  instead  of  'the  seed,'  as  in 
our  version,  which  seems  to  restrict  it 
to  seed  intended  for  sowing. 

39.  If  any  beast  of  which  ye  may  eat, 
die.  That  is,  which  eiiher  dies  of 
itself,  or  is  lorn  by  wild  beasts,  or  is 
suffocated,  so  that  the  blood  remains  in 
the  veins.     Such  meat  hecanse  unlawful 


not  only  to  be  eaten,  but  lo  be  touched; 
the  carcasses  o[  unclean  animals,  whe. 
ilier  they  died  by  disease  or  were  killed  ; 
but  lliose  of  clean  animals  hadihiseffect 
only  when  they  died  of  themselves. 

40.  He  that  eateth  of  the  carcass  of  it 
That  is,  ignoranlly  ;  for  if  he  did  it 
knowingly  and  presumptuously,  against 
the  positive  command,  it  constituted 
the  high-handed  offence  against  which 
the  doom  of  excision,  the  most  fearful 
penalty  of  the  law,  was  threatened. 
Num.  15.  30,  Deut.  14.21. 

41,42.  Every  creeping  thing.  This 
rule  is  of  course  to  be  understood  with 
the  exceptions  staled  above,  in  vv.  21-24, 
and  all  creatures  of  the  creeping  kind 
that  may  be  ranged  under  the  three 
following  classes;  (1.)  Those  which 
move  by  the  aid  of  the  under  part  of 
ihe  stomach  and  belly,  as  serpents. 
(2.)  Those  which,  though  they  have 
four  legs,  nevertheless  move  like  rep- 
tiles, as  lizards,  moles.  &c.  (3)  Those 
which  move  by  short  and  almost  imiier- 
ceptible  feet,  as  caterpillars,  centipedes, 
millepedes,  &c.  The  42d  verse  seems 
10  be  merely  explanatory  of  v.  41. 

43.  Ye  shall  not  make  yourselves 
abominable.  Heb.  WnrSD  '\:^pTi:t\  btS 
al  teshakketzu  naphthosh'ckem,  ye  shall 
not  make  abominable  your  souls.   They 


112 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1^00. 


44  For  I  am  the  Lord  your  God  ;  I  to  be  your  God  :  >•  ye  shall  there- 
ye  shall  therefore  sanctify  your-  j  fore  be  holy,  for  I  ayn  holy, 
selves,  and  rye  shall  be  holy';  for  I  46  This  is  ihe  law  of  the  beasts, 
I  am  holy  :  neither  shall  ye  defile  |  and  of  the  fowl,  and  of  every  living 
yourselves  with  any  manner  of  j  creature  that  movelh  in  the  waters, 
creeping  thing  that  creepeth  upon    and  of  every  creature  that  creepeih 


the  earth 

45  q  For  lam  the  Lord  that  bring- 
eth  you  up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt, 


P  Exod.  la. 
1  Thess.  4.  7. 


6.     ch.   19.  2,  and   20.  7 

1  Pet.  1.  15,  16.     q  Exod.  6.  7 


upon  the  earth  : 

47  s  To  make  a  difference  between 

the  unclean  and  the  clean,  and  be- 

i  tween  the  beast  that  may  be  eaten 

26.  j  and  the  beast  that  may  not  be  eaten. 

r  ver.  44.         »  ch.  10.  10. 


would  make  themselves  abominable  i^ 
they  ate  them,  and  unclean  if  they  did 
but  touch  them. 

44.  For  I  ain  the  Lord  your  God,  fyc. 
See  Note  on  Ex.  3.  15,  18.  We  have 
here  the  spiritual  drift  of  all  these  car- 
nal and  ceremonial  ordinances  ;  for 
'  meat  commendeih  us  not  lo  God,'  nor 
is  '  any  thing  unclean  of  itself,'  nor  is 
there  '  any  thing  from  without  a  man 
which  entering  in  can  defile  him.'  A 
grand  moral  purport  was  couched  under 
all  these  legal  rites,  and  from  the  de- 
claration in  these  verses  we  cannot  fail 
to  discern  what  it  is.  As  God  himself 
is  a  being  of  infinite  purity  and  perfec- 
tion,unutterably  surpassing  all  the  false 
gods  of  the  heathen,  so  it  was  his  pur- 
pose that  his owncovcnant  people  should 
be  signally  separated  and  distinguished 
in  their  mode  of  life  from  all  the  sur- 
rounding nations,  and  thus  by  being  de- 
barred from  intercourse  with  them,  be 
secured  also  from  participation  in  their 
corruptions  and  idolatries. IT  Nei- 
ther shall  ye  defile  yourselves.  Heb. 
CjT'ITSJ  naphshoth'ikem,  your  souls; 
as  in  the  preceding  verse.  On  the  pe- 
culiar use  of  this  term  in  Hebrew,  see 
Note  on  Gen.  34. 29.  In  this  connexion  it 
evidently  has  relation  rather  to  the  body 
than  the  mind,  as  is  often  the  case  else- 
where. 

45.  I  am  the  Lord  that  bringeth  you 
up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  fyc.  This 
was  an  act  of  favor  signal  and  illustri- 
ous, and  lying  so  essentially  at  the 
foundation  of  all  other  mercies  towards 


Ihem  as  a  nation,  that  it  is  again  and 
again  appealed  to  with  a  view  to  im- 
press a  sense  of  their  obligations  on 
their  liearts.  There  could  not  be  a 
greater  aggravation  of  their  guilt  than 
to  be  unmindful  of  what  God  had 
wrought  for  them  in  their  deliverance 
by  a  stretched-out  arm  from  the  house 
of  bondage. 

46.  This  is  the  law  of  beasts,  4c 
That  is,  this  collection  of  laws  in  the 
present  chapter  constitutes  that  code 
which  is  to  regulate  the  distinction  of 
living  creatures  into  clean  and  unclean, 
and  thereby  to  afford  you  a  rule  by 
which  to  distinguish  between  the  dif- 
ferent kinds  of  meat  which  may  and 
which  may  not  be  eaten. 

47.  To  make  a  difference  between  the 
unclean  and  the  clean.  Heb.  ^^Iinb 
lehavdil,  to  separate,  to  divide.  It  is 
the  same  word  which  occurs  v.  10  of 
the  preceding  chapter,  where  the  priests 
are  commanded  to  be  always  sober, that 
they  may  be  able  '  to  put  a  difference 
(^i")^np  lehavdil)  between  holy  and 
unholy,  between  unclean  and  clean,' 
which  they  were  to  do  not  only  for 
themselves,  but  also  for  others,  for  *  the 
priest's  lips  should  keep  knowledge.' 
Accordingly  it  is  said,  Ezek.  44.  23, 
'  And  they  shall  teach  my  people  the 
difference  between  the  holy  and  profane, 
and  cause  them  to  discern  betv  een  the 
unclean  and  the  clean.'  And  so  also 
Jer.  15.  19,  '  Therefore  thus  saith  the 
Lord,  If  thou  return,  then  will  I  bring 
thee  again,  and  thou  shall  stand  before 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XII. 


113 


me :  and  if  thou  take  forth  the  precious 
from  the  vile,  thou  shall  be  as  my 
mouih:  let  them  return  unto  thee  ;  but 
return  not  thou  unto  them.'  Whereas 
the  opposite  is  expressively  set  forth, 
Ezek.  22.  26, '  Her  priests  have  violated 
niy  lavir,  and  have  profaned  mine  holy 
things  :  they  have  put  no  difference  be- 
tivecn  the  holy  and  profane,  neither 
have  they  showed  difference  between  the 
unclean  and  the  clean,  and  have  hid 
their  eyes  froiii  my  sabbaths,  and  I  am 
profaned  among  them.' 


General  Results. — On  a  retrospect 
of  this  chapter,  it  will  be  seen  that  the 
legal  restrictions  imposed  upon  the 
Hebrews  by  the  laws  of  Moses,  as  to 
animal  food,  were,  in  their  general  re- 
sults, as  follows  : — 

With  the  exception  of  locusts,  the 
whole  of  the  invertebrate  classes  are 
prohibited. 

Of  the  vertebrate  animals,  the  whole 
of  the  order  of  reptiles  are  prohibited. 

Of  the  orders  mammalia  and  pisces, 
i.  e.  quadrupeds  and  fishes,  a  classifica- 
tion is  made,  restricting  the  clean  quad- 
rupeds to  such  as  parted  the  hoof,  and 
v/ere  cloven-footed,  and  chewed  the 
cud  ;  and  the  clean  fishes,  to  such  as 
had  fins  and  scales.  These  definitions 
are  so  precise  and  comprehensive,  that 
there  could  not  be  much  difficulty  in 
determining  what  was  excluded  by 
them.  They  permitted  the  eating  only 
a  few  of  the  graminivorous  quadrupeds, 
such  as  oxen,  sheep,  and  deer  ;  and 
such  fishes  (whether  from  salt  or  fresh 
water)  as  had  the  clear  and  obvious 
character  of  fins  and  scales;  most,  if 
not  all,  of  which  afibrd  a  palatable  and 
nutritious  diet. 

To  prevent  the  possibility,  however, 
of  mistake,  a  few  of  the  prohibited 
quadrupeds  are  specified ;  viz.  the  camel, 
the  jerboa,  (a  cotnmon  animal  in  the 
East)  the  hare,  the  mole,  the  mouse, 
and  the  bat ;  the  ape  and  monkey  tribe 
are  excluded,  by  the  apt  definition  of 
animals  going  upou  their  paws  or  fingers. 
10« 


With  respect  to  birds,  it  is  singular 
that  no  general  definition  is  given  of 
the  clean  or  unclean ;  but  certain  spe- 
cies or  genera  are  enumerated  and  de- 
clared unclean,  leaving  it  to  be  inferred 
that  all  the  rest  might  be  eaten. 

According  to  the  view  taken  above, 
all  vultures,  eagles,  falcons,  hawks, 
crows,  ostriches,  sea-gulls,  owls,  peli- 
cans, ibises,  storks,  herons,  and  hoopoes 
were  declared  unclean.  Linnaeus  di- 
vided the  aves  (birds)  into  78  genera  : 
not  more  than  eleven  of  these  are  pro- 
hibited by  the  laws  of  Moses.  The  67 
remaining  genera  include  among  them 
the  whole  of  the  anseres,  or  goose  and 
duck  tribe  ;  the  whole  of  the  gallince,  or 
grain-eating  tribe,  as  peacocks,  pheas- 
ants, partridges,  quails,  and  common 
fowls.  The  whole  of  the  passeres,  in- 
cluding doves,  pigeons,  and  numerous 
genera  of  small  fruit  and  seed-eating 
birds.  These,  and  various  other  genera 
of  birds,  seem  to  have  been  deemed 
clean  ;  from  whence,  perhaps,  it  may 
be  inferred,  that  the  flesh  of  birds  was 
considered  in  that  early  age  peculiarly 
wholesome  and  nutritious  food.  It  is 
well  known  also,  that  geese,  ducks, 
quails,  pigeons,  and  birds  of  that  kind, 
abound  in  Egypt  and  Palestine. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

Laws  relative  to  the  Purification  of 
Women  after  Child-birth. 
The  ordinances  contained  in  this 
chapter  having,  like  most  of  the  code  to 
which  they  belong,  been  abolished  under 
the  gospel,  can  have  little  practical  re- 
lation to  us;  yet  the  perusal  of  them 
cannot  but  be  interesting  to  the  Christian 
reader  from  their  connexion  with  some 
of  the  incidents  of  the  gospel  history. 
We  learn  from  one  of  the  evangelists, 
that  when  the  mother  of  our  Lord  went 
up  to  the  Temple  with  her  offering  in 
obedience  to  this  law,  she  was  not  able 
to  offer  a  lamb,  but  was  obliged  to  ac- 
cept the  alternative  allowed  to  the  poor, 
of  offering   two   turtle  doves,   or  two 


114 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

AND  tlie  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, saying,  If  a  a  woman  have 
conceived  seed,  and  borne  a  man- 
child,  then  b  she  shall  be  unclean 
seven  days:  c according  to  the  days 
of  the  separation  for  her  infirmity 
shall  she  be  unclean. 

a  ch.  15.  19.     b  Luke  2.  22.     c  ch.  15.  19. 


3  And  in  the  ^  eighth  day  the  flesh 
of  his  foreskin  shall  be  circumcised. 

4  And  she  shall  then  continue  in 
the  blood  of  her  purifying  three  and 
thirty  days :  she  shall  touch  no 
hallowed  thing,  nor  come  into  the 
sanctuary,  until  the  days  of  hec 
purifying  be  fulfilled. 

d  Gen.  17.  12.  Luke  1.  59,  and  2.  21. 
John  7.  22,  23. 


vfiiing  pigeons.  Tlius  an  interesting 
-fvidtnce  is  furnished  of  the  low  circuni- 
siances  of  the  family  into  which  llie 
S-.ivior  was  born.  While  tlie  Israelites 
remained  in  the  wilderness,  it  is  proba- 
hle  thai  the  women  brouglil  their  ofier- 
ings  immediately  after  the  period  of 
their  separation  hadexpired.  Butwhen 
they  were  settled  in  Palestine,  and 
many  fam.ihes  lived  at  a  distance  froin 
the  Temple,  it  may  be  presumed  that 
they  were  allowed  to  consult  their  con- 
venience on  this  point.  It  is  at  least 
certain  that  after  the  birth  of  Samuel, 
1  Sam.  1.  21,  his  iimlher  Flannah  did 
not  go  to  the  tabernacle  until  the  child 
was  weaaed. 

1.  The  Lord  sjpake  unto  Moses,  say- 
ing, &c.  The  directions  in  lliis  chapter 
are  given  to  Moses  alone,  whereas  those 
in  the  preceding  were  delivered  to  him 
and  Aaron  conjointly,  as  are  those 
which  follow,  ch.  13,  respecting  the 
Leprosy.  The  reason  of  this  was,  that 
it  peculiarly  devolved  upon  Aaron  and 
his  ions  to  discriminate  in  this  matter 
between  the  clean  and  unclean  ;  and  as 
it  was  a  matter  attended  with  some 
difnculty,  they  are  especially  charged 
!)Y  God  in  respect  to  it.  But  as  the 
I'gal  jjurificalion  of  a  woman  was  a 
ceremony  of  very  obvious  import  and 
easy  execution,  it  was  sufficient  that 
they  received  tlieir  instructions  respect- 
ing it  froi:i  Moses. 

2.  If  a  woman  have  conceived  seed 
and  borne  a  man-child.  Heb.  2'"'""iTr, 
iazria,  hath  seeded,  or  yielded  seed, 
equivalent  to  conception,  as  it  is  ren- 


dered in  the  Chal.  and  other  versions, 
though  the  usual  word  to  express  this 
idea  is  tTiil  ^hdrdh,  and  not  >*"it  zdra. 
The  prescribed  period  of  uncleanness 
on  the  birth  of  a  male  child  was  to  be 
seven  days,  on  that  of  a  female  fourteen. 
The  reason  of  the  distinction  is  not  ob- 
vious. Peril. ips  the  most  probable  sug- 
gestion is,  that  it  was  intended  to  con- 
ciliate greater  respect  toward  the  mo- 
ther of  a  male  child,  having  reference 
to  that  studied  recognition  ol'  the  supe- 
riority of  this  sex  which  pervades  the 

Mosaic  institutions. IF  According  to 

the  days  of  the  sejiaration  for  her  in- 
Jirmily.  Heb.  r.Tm  fn2  "'JZ^-lD  kimii 
niddath  devothah,  according  to  the  days 
of  the  separation  of  her  sick7iess.  On 
tins  point  the  reader  may  consult  ch. 
15.  19 — 25.  Throughout  this  first  period 
of  her  legal  uncleanness  she  neither 
partook  of  any  thing  that  was  holy,  nor 
enjoyed  intercourse  with  any  person. 
Even  her  husband  did  not  eal  or  driidc 
with  her,  and  those  who  attended  uj-on 
her  became  thereby  unclean.  After 
seven  days  the  rigor  of  tiiis  separation 
was  relaxed,  as  we  shall  see  below. 
As  to  the  rite  of  circumcision  which 
was  to  follow  on  the  eighth  day,  see 
Note  on  Gen.  17.  12. 

4.  She  shall  then  continue.  Heb. 
^'iL"ri  ti'shib,  shall  sit ;  a  common  term 
to  express  abiding  or  continuing  in  a 
particular  place  or  state.  'Jhis  '  con- 
tinuance' in  the  blood  of  her  purifying 
was  to  be  reckoned  from  the  end  of  the 
seven  days  above-mentioned,  so  that 
the  whole  time  amounted  to  forty  days. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


115 


5  But  if  she  bear  a  maid-child, 
then  she  shall  be  unclean  two 
weeks,  as  ia  her  separation  :  and 
she  shall  continue  in  ihe  blood  of 
her  purifying  three-score  and  six 
days. 

6  And  e  when  the  days  of  her  pu- 
rifying are  fulfilled,  for  a  son,  or  for 
a  daughter,  she  shall  bring  a  lamb 
of  the  tirst  year  for  a  burnt-offering, 
and  a  young  pigeon,  or  a'  turtle- 
dove, for  a  sin-offering,  unto  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation, unto  the  priest: 

e  Luke  -2.  22. 

During  ihis  latter  portion  of  the  time, 
though  she  was  by  no  means  doomed  to 
an  utter  separation  from  all  society, 
yet  she  was  to  be  debarred  from  the 
saiicluarj',  and  from  all  participation 
in  the  sacrifices  of  the  Passover  and  the 
Peace-offoriiigs,  of  which  she  would 
otherwise  be  pormiltcd  to  eat. 

5.  But  if  site  have  a  maid-child.  In 
the  case  of  the  birih  of  a  daughter,  the 
time  of  strict  separation  was  just  dou- 
ble that  prescribed  at  the  birth  of  a 
son,  and  so  also  was  the  time  of  their 
subsequent  purification,  it  being  sixty- 
six  days  before  she  was  admitted  to  the 
sanctuary.  During  this  time  she  was 
said  to  '  continue  in  the  blood  of  her 
piirifyins,'  by  which  it  is  not  to  be  un- 
derstood that  there  was  any  thing  phy- 
sically impure  in  the  slate  of  the  blood 
at  this  lime."  On  the  contrary,  the 
blood  is  perfectly  pure  as  to  ils  quality, 
though  somewhat  excessive  in  quantity, 
for  reasons  well  known  lo  physiologists. 
The  purification  enjoined  was  wholly 
of  a  ceremonial,  and  not  at  all  of  a 
physical,  kind. 

6.  And  uhen  the  days  of  her  purifica- 
tion are  fuelled,  &c.  We  have  here 
the  divine  ordinance  as  to  the  manner 
ia  which  the  close  of  this  period  of 
purification  should  be  celebrated.  On 
the  forty-first  day  from  the  birth  of  the 
child,  if  a  male,  or  the  eighty-first,  if  a 
female,  the  mother  was  to  appear  at  the 


7  Who  shall  offer  it  before  the 
Lord,  and  make  an  atonement  for 
her ;  and  she  shall  be  cleansed  from 
the  issue  of  her  blood.  This  is  the 
law  for  her  that  hath  borne  a  male 
or  a  female. 

8  f  And  if  she  be  not  able  to  bring 
a  lamb,  then  she  shall  bring  two 
turtles,  or  two  young  pigeons;  the 
one  for  the  burnt-offering,  and  the 
other  for  a  sin-offering:  sand  the 
priest  shall  make  an  atonement 
for  her,  and  she  shall  be  clean. 

f  ch.  5.  7.    Luke  2.  24.     S  ch.  4.  26 


tabernacle,  with  the  present  of  a  two- 
fold offering,  by  way  of  testimony  to 
her  grateful  sense  of  the  mercies  vouch- 
safed to  her  ; — the  one  a  burnt-offering 
of  a  lamb  of  the  first  year,  and  the 
other  a  sin-offering  of  a  young  pigeon 
or  a  turtle-dove.  We  notice,  however, 
in  the  connexion  a  kindly  provision  in 
behalf  of  those  who  were  not  able, 
from  extreme  povertj',  to  bring  a  lamb 
on  this  occasion.  Tiiey  might  com- 
mute the  offering  by  doubling  the  obla- 
tion of  birds  ;  and  tliis  we  learn  from 
the  Evangelist,  Luke  2.  24,  was  done 
by  the  mother  of  our  Lord.  What  a 
striking  view  does  this  afford  us  of  the 
circumstances  in  which  He  was  usliered 
into  life,  who  was  not  only  heir  to  the 
throne  of  David,  but  appointed  also  to 
be  '  Lord  of  lords  and  King  of  kings  !' 


CHAPTER  XIIL 
Among  the  various  diseases  to  which 
the  Israelites  were  subject,  none  was  so 
odious,  so  formidable,  so  incurable  as 
the  Leprosy,  which  forms  the  subject 
of  the  present  cliapter.  Although  this 
disease  was  not  peculiar  lo  the  Jews, 
as  it  prevailed  in  Egypt,  Syria,  and  the 
northern  part  of  upper  Asia,  yet  it  was 
regarded  by  the  chosen  people  as  pro- 
ceeding immediately  from  the  hand  of. 
God,  and  was  always  considered  as  a 
punishment  for  sin.  Accordingly  it 
was  usually  denominated  by  them  ^^2T^ 


116 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

AND  the  Loud  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2  When  a" man  shall  have  in  the 
skin  of  his  flesh  a  rising,  a  a  scab, 

a  Deut.  ^3.  '21.     Isai.  3.  17. 

hanni'ga,  V.yl'^'2  :>a]  ni'ga  tzaraath,  the 
stroke  or  u-ound,  i.  e.  by  supplying  the 
ellipsis,  the  stroke  or  wound  of  the 
Lord.  The  disease,  though  not  unknown 
in  modern  times,  is  yet  comparatively 
rare,  especially  in  European  countries, 
and  in  our  own,  is  scarcely  known  at  all. 
Its  leading  characteristic,  as  outwardly 
visible,  is  a  spoiled  skin.  These  spots 
in  the  outset  are  commonly  small,  re- 
sembling  the  pustules  made  by  the 
prick  of  a  pin,  but  they  gradually  in- 
crease in  size,  and  often  for  a  number 
of  years,  till  they  become  as  large  as  a 
coffee-bean,  covering  the  whole  body, 
and  finally  terminating  in  ulcers,  which 
penetrate  inwardly  till  they  have  pro- 
duced a  complete  caries  of  the  bones, 
and  the  whole  body  becomes  little 
better  than  a  mass  of  corrupiion.  But 
spots  upon  the  body  resembling  these 
were  not  always  the  effect  of  leprosy; 
t  therefore  became  important  to  lay 
down  rules  for  distinguishing  between 
leprous  spots  and  those  which  are  harm- 
less, and  result  from  other  causes. 
This  is  the  object  of  the  present  chap- 
ter ;  and  no  part  of  the  Leviiical  code 
will  appear  more  worthy  of  its  divine 
author  than  this,  when  we  consider  that 
it  was  designed,  not  wantonly  to  fix  the 
charge  of  being  a  leper  upon  an  inno- 
cent person,  and  thus  to  impose  upon 
him  a  load  of  grievous  restraints  and 
inconveniences,  but  to  ascertain  in  the 
fairest  and  most  satisfactory  manner 
the  real  subjects  of  the  scourge,  and  to 
separate  them  from  all  intercourse 
v/ith  their  fellow-men.  As  this  was  the 
prominent  aim  of  the  laws  on  this  sub- 
ject, viz.  to  secure  a  fair  and  impartial 
decision  of  the  main  question,  of  the 
fact  of  the  disease,  Moses  has  not  men- 
tioned those  signs  of  leprosy  which  ad- 


or  bright  spot,  and  it  be  in  the 
skin  of  his  flesh,  like  the  plague  of 
leprosy;  b then  he  shall  be  brought 
unto  Aaron  the  priest,  or  unto  one 
of  his  sons  the  priests: 

b  Deut.  17.  8,  9,  and  24.  S.     Luke   17.  14. 


mitted  of  no  doubt,  but  those  only 
which  might  be  the  subject  of  conten- 
tion, and  left  it  to  the  priests  to  distin- 
guish between  the  really  leprous,  and 
those  who  had  only  the  appearance  of 
being  such. 

Rtiles  for  distinguishing  the  Leprosy. 
2.  When  a  man  shall  have  in  the  skin 
of  his  flesh  a  rising,  a  scab,  or  bright 
spot,  and  it  be  in  the  skin  of  his  flesh 
like  the  plague  of  leprosy.  Heb.  tT^m 
Vi^'^'S  >ri:p  vehayah  lenega  tzaraath, 
and  it  become  to  a  stroke  of  leprosy. 
That  is,  so  as  to  assume  the  appearance 
and  excite  the  suspicion  of  leprosy. 
The  term  *  leprosy,'  is  derived  from  the 
Gr.  'Ke-pn,  lepra,  from  'Xettis,  a  scale,  be- 
cause in  this  disease  the  body  was  often 
covered  with  thin  white  scales,  so  as  to 
give  it  the  appearance  of  snow.  Thus 
it  is  said  of  the  hand  of  Moses,  Ex.  4.  6, 
that  it  was  '  leprous  as  snow  ;'  and  of 
Miriam,  Num.  12.  10,  that '  she  became 
leprous,  white  as  snow ;'  so  also  of 
Gehazi,  2  Kings,  5.  27,  that  '  he  went 
from  his  (Elisha's)  presence,  a  leper 
as  white  as  snoiv.^  This  peculiarity  of 
the  disease  is  thus  accounted  for  in  the 
'  Medica  Sacra'  of  Mead.  '  The  seeds 
of  leprous  contagion  are  mixed  with  an 
acrid  and  salt  humor,  derived  fron)  the 
blood,  which,  as  it  naturally  ought  part- 
ly to  have  turned  into  nutriment,  and 
partly  to  have  perspired  through  the 
skin,  it  now  lodges  and  corrodes  the 
little  scales  of  the  cuticlt,  and  these 
becoming  dry  and  wliiie,  sometimes 
even  as  while  as  snow,  are  separated 
from  the  skin,  and  fall  off  like  bran.' 
The  Heb.  term  is  t"i3?*n2  tzaraah,  from 
a  root  signifying  to  strike,  or  smite  as 
trilh  some  venomous  or  infectious  mat' 
ter.     Hence,  the  true  import  of  the 


8.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


117 


3  And  the  priest  shall  look  on  the 
plague  in  the  skin  of  the  flesh  :  and 
when  the  hair  in  the  plague  is 
turned  while,  and  the  plague  in 
si^ht  be  deeper  than  the  skin  of 
his  flesh,  it  is  a  plague  of  leprosy: 

uiiginal  is  a  fretting  soreness,  or  a 
piercing  infectious scabbiness,  denomi- 
iialed  also  in  the  scriptures,  '  the 
plague,'  i.  e.  the  '  stroke,'  or  the 
'  'Aouiid'of  leprosy,  as  the  Jews  regarded 
it  as  :i  disease  sent  directly  from  God 
as  a  punishment  of  sin,  Moses  having 
prescribed  no  natural  remedy  for  the 
cure  of  it.  In  the  Chal.  it  is  termed 
r."!'^'^3D  segiruth,  shutting  up,  because 
it  caused  men  to  be  secluded  from  so- 
ciety. Tliis  dreadful  disease  which 
prevails  in  Egypt  and  Syria,  generally 
inriuilests  itself  at  first,  in  the  manner 
described  in  the  text.  Its  commence- 
ment is  scarcely  perceptible  ;  there 
appearing  only  a  few  reddish  spots  on 
Ihe  skin  which  are  not  attended  with 
pain  or  any  other  symptom,  but  which 
cannot  be  removed.  It  increases  im- 
perceptibly, and  continues  for  some 
years  to  be  more  and  more  manifest. 
The  spots  become  larger,  spreading 
over  the  skin,  till  at  length  they  cover 
the  whole  body  with  a  leprous  scurf. 
The  disease  atT'^cis  at  the  same  lime 
the  marrow  and  the  bones  ;  so  much  so, 
that  the  farthest  joints  in  the  system 
gradually  lose  their  powers,  and  the 
members  fall  together  in  such  a  man- 
ner, as  to  give  the  body  a  mutilated  and 
dreadful  appearance.  In  its  final  stages, 
the  whole  mass  of  the  patient's  flesh 
and  blood  seems  to  turn  to  corruption, 
and  he  may  be  said  almost  literally  to 
fall  to  pieces.  This  disease,  though 
very  infrequent  in  Europe,  indeed,  al- 
most extinct,  made  its  appearance  about 
the  year  HSO  in  the  western  continent, 
and  spread  its  ravages  in  the  sugar 
islands  of  the  West  Indies,  particularly 
Guadaloupe.  M.  Peysonnel,  who  was 
sent  to  that  island  in  order  to  acquaint 
himself  with  the  nature  of  the  disease, 


and  the  priest  shall  look  on  him, 
and  pronounce  him  unclean. 
4  If  the  bright  spot  be  white  in 
the  skin  of  his  flesh,  and  in  sight 
be  not  deeper  than  the  skin,  and 
the    hair   thereof    be    not   turned 


observes,  after  giving  the  symptoms 
as  above  mentioned,  that  '  as  tiie  disease 
advances,  the  upper  part  of  the  nose 
swells,  the  nostrils  become  enlarged, 
and  the  nose  itself  soft.  Tumors  ap- 
pear on  the  jaws;  the  eyebrows  swell  ; 
the  ears  become  thick  ;  the  points  of 
the  fingers,  as  also  the  feet  and  toes, 
swell  ;  the  nails  become  scaly  ;  the 
joints  of  the  hands  and  feet  separate 
and  drop  off.  On  the  palms  of  the 
hands,  and  on  the  soles  of  the  feet,ap. 
pear  deep  dry  ulcers,  which  increase 
rapidly  and  then  disappear  again.  In 
short,  in  the  last  stage  of  the  disease 
the  patient  becomes  a  hideous  spectacle, 
and  falls  in  pieces.  These  symptoms 
supervene  by  very  slow  and  successive 
steps,  requiring  often  many  years  be- 
fore they  all  occur.  The  patient  suffers 
no  violent  pain,  but  feels  a  sort  of  numb- 
ness in  his  hands  and  feet.  During  the 
whole  period  of  the  disorder,  those 
afflicted  with  it  experience  no  obstruc- 
tion in  what  are  called  the  Naturalia. 
They  eat  and  drink  as  usual ;  and  even 
when  their  fingers  and  toes  mortify,  the 
loss  of  the  mortified  parts  is  the  only 
consequence  that  ensues ;  for  the  wound 
heals  of  itself  without  any  medical 
treatment  or  application.  When,  how- 
ever, the  unfortunate  wretches  come  to 
the  last  period  of  the  disease,  they  are 
hideously  disfigured,  and  objects  of  the 
greatest  compassion.' 

3,  4.  Pronounce  him  unclean.  Heb. 
iriii  fc<?2n  timm'e  otko,  shall  make  him 
unclean,  or  shall  pollute  him  ;  a  phrase- 
ology of  not  unfrequent  occurrence,  by 
which  one  is  said  to  do  that  which  he 
merely,  in  a  ministerial  capacity,  pro- 
nounces, predicts,  or  declares  to  be  done. 
Thus  Ezek.  43.  3,  is  said  to  '  destroy 
the  city,'  when  he  simply  pronounced 


118 


LEVITICUS. 


(B.  C.  1490. 


white;  then  the  priest  shall  shut 
up  him  that  Imtk  the  plague  seven 
days: 

5  And  the  priest  shall  look  on 
him  the  seventh  day:  and  beliold, 
if  the  plague  in  his  sight  be  at  a 
stay,  and  the  plague  spread  not  in 
the  skin  ;  then  tlie  priest  shall  shut 
him  up  seven  days  more  : 

6  And  the  priest  shall  look  on 
him  again  the  seventh  day :  and 


or  prophecied  its  destruction.  In  like 
manner  the  apostles,  as  ministers  of 
Christ,  are  said  to  liavebeen  empowered 
to  hind  and  to  loose,  to  remit  men's 
sins,  and  to  retain  them,  when  all  that 
is  intended  is,  that  they  were  simply  to 
declare  them  to  be  so  bound  or  luoscd, 
remitted  or  retained,  according  to  the 
tenor  of  God's  word.  It  is  to  be  observ- 
ed,  that  tliere  are  three  signs  of  a 
leprosy  stated  in  the  first  verse  ;  (1)  a 
tumor  or  swelling  ;  (2)  a  scab;  (3)  a 
bright  spot.  Of  these  indications,  the 
sacred  writer  begins  with  the  last,  viz. 
the  bright  spot,  in  which,  if  the  hair 
were  turned  while,  and  it  was  not  a 
superficial  whiteness  merely,  but  the 
spot  seemed  to  have  eaten  deeper,  even 
into  the  very  flesh,  then  it  was  beyond 
doubt  that  it  was  a  true  leprosy.  But 
if  upon  inspection  there  merely  appear- 
ed a  while  spot  in  the  skin,  which  had 
not  affected  the  color  of  the  hair,  then 
it  could  not  be  positively  determined 
that  the  disease  was  leprosy.  But  it 
had  some  of  the  symptoms  of  leprosy, 
and  might  prove  to  be  such  ;  at  any 
rate  appearances  were  so  far  against  the 
person  that  it  was  proper  he  should  be 
separated  from  others  long  enough  to 
afford  lime  for  an  accurate  judgment  of 
the  nature  of  the  affection.  The  priest 
therefore  was  to  shut  him  up  for  seven 
days,  during  which  lime  it  would  be  apt 

to    develope    its    true    character. 

IT  Shall  shut  up  him  that  hath  the  plague. 
The  words  '  him  that  hath,'  it  will  be 
uoticed,  are  not  found  in  the  text,  of 


behold,  if  the  plague  be  somewhat 
dark,  and  the  plague  spread  not  in 
the  skin,  the  priest  shall  pronounce 
him  clean:  it  is  but  a  scab:  and 
he  c  shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  be 
clean. 
7  But  if  the  scab  spread  much 
abroad  in  the  skin,  after  that  he 
hath  been  seen  of  the  priest  for  his 
cleansing,  he  shall  be  seen  of  the 
priest  again : 

c  ch.  1.  25,  and  14.  3. 

which  the  true  rendering  is, '  Shall  shut 
up  the  plague.'  Gr.  aipopici  rrju  d'pijv, 
shall  separate  the  plague.  This  is  a 
usage  of  the  sacred  writers,  by  wliich 
the  abstract  is  put  for  the  concrete, 
often  met  with,  as  '  captivity '  for  *  cap- 
tives,' Ps.  68.  19  ;  *  the  hoary  head  '  lor 
Mioary  headed  person,'  Lev.  19.  32; 
'rebellion'  for  'the  rebellious,' Ezek. 
44.  6  ;  'a  charge '  for  '  those  having 
charge,'  Ezek,  44.  11  ;  '  pride  '  for 
'  proud  man,'  Jer.  50.  31  ; '  circumcision 
for '  those  circumcised,'  Rom.  2.  26. 

5.  If  the  plague  in  his  sight  be  at  a 
stay.  Heb.  *^72^  ^^2  n'tga  Cimad,  the 
plague  stand.  If  the  priest,  at  the 
week's  end,  saw  no  alteration  in  the 
symptoms,  as  the  case  remained  dubi- 
ous, he  was  to  prolong  the  period  of 
separation  another  seven  days,  and  if  at 
the  end  of  that  time  the  appearance  of 
the  affected  part  continued  the  same, 
except  that  the  while  spot  began  to  as- 
sume  a  somewhat  darkish  hue,  then  he 
was  to  pronounce  him  clean,  i.  e.  free 
from  the  plague  of  leprosy.  Still  as 
the  very  cause  that  had  led  to  his  being 
suspected  showed  that  there  was  some 
degree  of  impurity  in  his  blood,  a  slight 
purification  was  prescribed,  the  moral 
effect  of  which  would  naturally  be  to 
teach  that  the  very  appearance  of  evil 
is  an  adequate  ground  of  humiliation  to 
any  one  that  fears  God. 

1.  If  the  scab  spread  much.    The  real 
leprosy  might  afier  all  lurk  in  the  sys- 
tem, notwithstanding  the  rigid  exami- 
l  nation  and  the  probationary  seclusion 


B.  C.  UOO.j 


CHAPTER  XL 


11& 


8  And  if  the  priest  see  that  be- 
hold, the  scab  spreadeih  in  the 
skin,  then  the  priest  shall  pro- 
nounce him  unclean :  it  is  a  leprosy. 

9  H  When  the  plague  of  leprosy 
is  in  a  man,  ihen^  he  shall  be 
brought  unto  the  priest  : 

10  d  And  the  priest  shall  see  him  : 
and  behold,  tf  the  rising  be  white 
la  the  skin,  and  it  have  turned  the 
liiiir  \yhite,  and  there  be  quick  raw 
iiesh  in  the  rising: 

1 1  It  is  an  old  leprosy  in  the  skin 

d  Numb.  12.  JO,  12.  2  Kings  5.  27.  2  Chron. 
2G.  20. 

to  which  the  person  had  been  subjected. 
If  the  scab  spread  subsequently  in  the 
skin,  the  symptom  was  decisive,  and 
the  jiriest  was  to  give  his  verdict  of 
'  unclean  '  accordingly  ;  and  Maimoni- 
des  tells  us,  that  if  any  one  were  so 
profane  as  to  neglect  his  case  under 
these  circumstances,  and  to  forbear 
going  to  tlie  priest  for  his  judgment, 
the  penally  was,  to  have  his  leprosy 
cleave  to  him  through  life, 

10.  If  the  rising  be  white  in  the  skin, 
&c.  These  symptoms  were  peculiar  to 
the  first  form  of  leprosy  mentioned, 
V.  2,  viz.  that  of  the  tumor  or  swelling. 
If  in  addition  to  the  whiteness  on  the 
skin,  and  the  hair  turning  white,  there 
was  also  the  presence  of  quick  raw 
flesh  in  the  swelling,  it  was  <in  indubita- 
ble sign  of  an  old  or  inveterate  leprosy, 
which  had  been  long  seated  in  the  sys- 
tem, and  the  priest  was  at  once  to  pro- 
nounce him  unclean,  without  the  cere- 
mony of  a  previous  shutting  up,  wluch 
was  ordered  in  doubtful  cases  only. 
Here  the  case  was  too  plain  to  admit 
of  doubt. 

Distinction  of  Leprosy  from  a  Cuta- 
neous Eruption  very  much  resem- 
bling it. 

12,  13.  If  a  leprosy  break  out  abroad, 
&c.  The  precept  in  this  case  appears 
singular.  Why  should  the  partial  leper 
be  pronounced  unclean,  while  the  per- 


of  his  flesh,  and  the  priest  shall 
pronounce  him  unclean,  and  shall 
not  shut  him  up :  for  he  is  unclean. 

12  And  if  a  leprosy  break  out 
abroad  in  the  skin,  and  the  leprosy 
cover  all  the  skin  of  him  thai  hath 
the  plague  from  his  head  even  to 
his  foot,  wheresoever  the  priest 
looketh  ; 

13  Then  the  priest  shall  consider: 
and  behold,  if  the  leprosy  have 
covered  all  his  flesh,  he  shall  pro- 
nounce him.  clean  that  hath  the 
plague;  it  is  all  turned  white  :  he 
is  clean. 


son  totally  covered  with  the  disease 
was  to  be  pronounced  clean  ?  The  true 
answer  perhaps  is,  that  it  was  owing  to 
a  different  species  or  a  different  stage 
of  the  disease;  the  partial  being  infec- 
tious, the  total  not.  The  fact  moreover 
that  the  disease  was  driven  out  to  the 
surface  argued  a  sound  and  liealthy 
state  of  tlie  system  in  general.  Yet  it 
is  but  proper  to  remark,  that  Patrick 
takes  entirely  a  different  view  of  tlie 
drift  of  this  passage.  He  supposes  that 
that  wluch  is  here  called  '  leprosy'  was 
not  truly  such,  but  another  disease  hav- 
ing so  strong  a  resemblance  to  the  lep- 
rosy, as  to  prompt  the  writer  to  give  it 
the  snme  denomination.  But  the  differ* 
ence  lay  in  the  fact,  that  in  this  quasi- 
leprosy  the  skin  was  entirely  covered 
by  one  continuous  scurf,  whereas  in  the 
true  leprosy,  the  spots  or  scabs  did  not 
run  together  in  the  manner  here  inti- 
mated, but  gave  a  sort  of  scaly 
appearance  to  the  body.  This  univer- 
sal eruption  from  head  to  foot, however 
loathsome  to  the  eye,  might  still  be 
harmless  in  itself,  and  perhaps  a  relief 
to  the  morbid  internal  condition  of  the 
body,  as  in  the  case  of  measles  and 
small-pox.  The  man,  therefore,  under 
these  circumstances  was  to  be  pronounc- 
ed  clean. IT   Shall    -pronounce  him 

clean  that  hath  the  plague.  Heb.  ^nt3 
>'32n  ?15<  tdhar  eth  hanndga,  shall  clean 
the  plague  ;  i.  e.  shall  pronounce  cleaa 


120 


LEVITICUS. 


[13.  C.  1490. 


14  But  when  raw  flesh  appeareih  i 
in  him,  he  shall  be  unclean.  j 

15  And  the  priest  shall  see  the  j 
raw  flesh,  and  pronounce  him  to  j 
be  unclean :  for  the  raw  flesh  is  \ 
unclean  :  it  is  a  leprosy.  | 

15  Or  if  the  raw  flesh  turn  again,  i 
:;i:d  be  changed  into  white,  he  shall ' 
(•"Hie  unto  the  priest ;  ! 

!7  And  the  priest  shall  see  iiim  :  j 
;nd  behold,  if  the  plague  be  turned  : 
i.ilo  white;  then  the  priest  shall 
[•ronounce  him  clean  that  hath  the  | 
j'lague  :  he  is  clean.  j 

IS  *[\  The  flesh  also,  in  which,  ! 
even  in  the  skin  thereof,  was  a  j 
e  boil,  and  is  healed,  j 

19  And  in  the  place  of  the  bile  j 
there  be  a  white  rising,  or  a  bright  \ 
spot,  white,  and  somewhat  reddish, 
and  it  be  showed  to  the  priest ; 

e  Exod.  9.  9. 


liim  that  hath  the  plague^  as  rightly 
rendered  in  the  English  translation.  See 
above  the  Note  on  v.  3. 

14-17.  But  when  raw  flesh  appeareth 
in  him,  &c.  That  is,  sound  flesh,  Gr. 
Xpojs  ^'ov,  living  flesh.  If  patclies  of 
sfiund  or  natural  flesh  appeared  inter- 
mingled  with  the  white  scurf  or  scales, 
the  presumption  was,  that  the  genuine 
leprosy  w^as  upon  him,  which  was  to 
be  thus  distinguished  from  that  cuta- 
neous eruption  mentioned  above.  Still 
even  this  sign  might  be  fallacious,  as 
the  sound  parts  of  the  skin,  or  the  *  raw 
flesh,'  might  ere  long  become  white  like 
t'e  rest,  and  then  the  proof  would  be 
decisive  that  it  was  not  leprosy,  and 
the  priest  was  to  pronounce  him  clean. 

Distinction  of  Leprosy,  when  occasion- 
ed by  a  former  Sore  or  Ulcer. 
18-23.  The  flesh  also  in  which,  even 
in  the  skin  thereof,  was  a  boil,  &c. 
Chal.  '  The  man  also  in  whose  skin,' 
&c.  In  this  and  the  following  verses, 
the  writer  treats  of  those  cases  of  lep- 
rosy that  rose  from  old  ulcers  that  had 
once    been    healed.       Such    cicatrized  i 


20  And  if,  when  the  priest  seeth 
it,  behold,  it  be  in  sight  lower  than 
the  skin,  and  the  hair  thereof  be 
turned  white ;  the  priest  shall  pro- 
nounce him  unclean  :  it  is  a  plague 
of  leprosy  broken  out  of  the  bile. 

21  But  if  the  priest  look  on  it,  and 
behold,  thei-e  be  no  white  hairs 
therein,  and  if  it  be  not  lower  than 
the  skin,  but  be  somewhat  dark; 
then  the  priest  shall  shut  him  up 
seven  days : 

22  And  if  it  spread  much  abroad 
in  the  skin,  then  the  priest  shall 
pronounce  him  unclean :  it  is  a 
plague. 

23  But  if  the  bright  spot  stay  in 
his  place,  and  spread  not,  it  is  a 
burning  boil ;  and  the  priest  shall 
pronounce  him  clean. 

24  H  Or  if  there  be  anij  flesh,  in 
the  skin,   whereof  there  is  a  hot 


sores  might  break  out  afresh  and  prove 
a  real  leprosy.  A  person  with  any 
sore  or  disposition  to  contagion,  was 
more  likely  to  catch  the  infection  from 
contact  with  the  diseased  person,  than 
he  was  whose  skin  was  whole  and 
sound,  and  his  habits  good.  The  requi- 
site   rules  of  discrimination  in    such 

cases,  are  here  given. IT  In  the  place 

of  the  boil.  In  the  place  where  the  boil 
formerly  broke  out,  hut  seemed  after- 
wards to  be  healed.  The  original  word 
for  'boil 'is  '^'^riD  s/ie'/iin,  the  expla- 
nation of  which  see  in  the  Note  on  Ex. 
9.9. 

Distinction  of  Leprosy,  when  occasion' 
ed  by  a  former  Burning. 
24-28.  In  the  skin  whereof  there  is 
a  hot  burning.  Heb.  'T^K  ni-TQ  mikvath 
'ish,  burning  of  fire.  The  case  alluded 
to  is  probably  one  where  a  burning  coal, 
or  hot  iron,  or  something  of  that  nature 
had  fallen  upon  the  flesh  and  caused  an 
inflammation  that  might  easily  give 
rise  to  leprosy  if  a  predisposition  to  it 
already  existed.  Horsley,  however, 
supposes    the    '  hot   burning'  was    an 


B.  C.  1490.] 


AFTER  Xril. 


121 


burning,  and  the  quicic  fiesh  that 
burneth  have  a  white  bright  spot, 
somewhat  reddish,  or  white  ; 

25  Then  the  priest  shall  look 
(ipon  it:  and  behold,  ?/ the  hair  in 
•!ie  bright  spot  be  turned  white, 
;^:.d  it  be  in  sight  deeper  than  the 
>*iu;  it  ?l^'  a  leprosy  broken  out  of 
>..-:  burning:  wherefore  the  priest 
•  i.ni  pronounce  him  unclean:  it 
-v  ;he  plague  of  leprosy. 

-')  out  il"  ijie  priest  look  on  it,  and 
\i:  ij:d,  there  be  no  white  hair  in 
Miti  bright  spot,  and  it  be  no  lower 
^-'-x.\  the  other  skin,  but  be  some- 
vviiat  dark;  then  the  priest  shall 
:  I'jt  him  up  seven  days: 

-1  And  the  priest  shall  look  upon 
l.iui  the  seventh  day:  and  if  it  be 
.-^(lead  much  abroad  in  the  skin, 
;  .^-'D  the  priest  shall  pronounce 
l.Mi  unclean:  it  is  the  plague  of 
:•  prosy. 

..a  And  if  the  bright  spot  stay  in 
■i^-i  place,  a7id  spread  not  in  the 
s\in,  but  it  be  somewhat  dark  ;  il 
c.v  ,1  rising  of  the  burning,  and  the 
|.;iest  shall  pronounce  him  clean: 
■.;<•  il  /5  an  inflammation  of  the 
l-Liroing. 

■ ')  ^[  if  a  man  or  Vv'oman  have  a 
;.  Iigue  upon  the  head  or  the  beard ; 

SO  Then  the  priest  shall  see  the 
jiUgue  :  and  behold,  if  it  6e  in  sight 
Cc-eper  than  the  skin,  and  there  be 
\r\  it  a  yellow  thin  hair;  then  the 
priest  shall  pronounce  him  unclean  : 
!.  IS  a  dry  scall,  even  a  leprosy 
■"-.oa  the  head  or  beard. 


vnjsipelas  or  St.  Anthony^ s fire.  What 
•vrf  it  were,  the  case  was  to  be  deter- 
iiMiied  by  the  rules  here  given. 

L  is- in  ct  ion  of  Leprosy  from  Dry-scall. 
29-37.  It  is  a  dry-scall.  Heb.  pt^D 
n-  iliek.  Gr.  dpuvafiti  cart,  it  is  a  broken 
sore.  The  original  comes  from  the 
root  priD  nuthak,  to  ■plucky  tear,  or  draw 
off.  and  is  the  name  of  a  disease  ])ecn- 
har  to  the  head  or  beard,  so  called  from 
<"ht  hairs  ueiiijr  draivn  nfffrau)  the  placr' 

u 


31-  And  if  the  priest  look  on  the 
plague  of  the  scall,  and  behold,  it 
be  not  in  sight  deeper  than  the  skin, 
and  that  there  is  no  black  hair  in 
it;  then  the  priest  shall  shut  up 
kirn  that  hath  the  plague  of  the 
scall  seven  days ; 

32  And  in  the  seventh  day  the 
priest  shall  look  on  the  plague : . 
and  behold,?/ the  scall  spread  not, 
and  there  be  in  it  no  yellow  hair, 
and  the  scall  be  not  in  sight  deeper 
than  the  skin  ; 

33  He  shall  be  shaven,  but  the 
scall  shall  he  not  shave;  and  the 
priest  shall  shut  up  him  that  hath 
the  scall  seven  days  more: 

34  A.nd  in  the  seventh  day  the 
priest  shall  look  on  the  scall:  and 
behold,  if  the  scall  be  not  spread 
in  the  skin,  nor  be  in  sight  deeper 
than  the  skin  ;  then  the  priest  shall 
pronounce  him  clean:  and  he  shall 
wash  his  clothes,  and  be  clean. 

35  But  if  the  scall  spread  much 
in  the  skin  after  his  cleansing; 

36  Then  the  priest  shall  look  on 
him :  and  behold,  if  the  scall  be 
spread  in  the  skin,  the  priest  shall 
not  seek  for  yellow  hair;  he  is 
unclean. 

37  But  if  the  scall  be  in  his  sight 
at  a  stay,  and  that  there  is  black 
hair  grown  up  therein ;  the  scall 
is  healed,  he  is  clean  :  and  the 
priest  shall  pronounce  him  clean. 

38  H  If  a  man  also  or  a  woman 
have  in  the  skin  of  their  flesh  bright 
spots,  even  bright  white  spots ; 


where  it  broke  out,  and  leaving  a  mor- 
bid baldness  in  its  stead.  The  Hebrews 
describe  it  thus  :  '  The  plague  of  the 
head  or  beard,  is  when  the  hair  that  is 
on  them  falleth  off  by  the  roots,  and 
the  place  of  the  hair  remaineth  bare  j  and 
this  is  that  which  is  called  '  nethek.' ' 

Distinction  of  Leprosy  from  the  '  Bo- 
hak  '  or  Freckled  Spot. 
3S.  If  a  man  also  or  a  woman.    The 
species  of  leprosy  here  defined  is  dis- 


122 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  G.  1490. 


39  Then  tlie  priest  shall  look: 
and  behold,  if  the  bright  spots  in 
the  skin  of  their  flesh  be  darkish 
white;  it  is  a  freckled  spot  that 
groweih  in  the  skin  ;  he  %s  clean. 

40  And  the  man  whose  hair  is 
fallen  off  his  head,  he  ^5  bald ;  yet 
is  he  clean. 

41  And  he  that  hath  his  hair 
fallen  off  from  the  part  of  his  head 
toward  his  face,  he  is  forehead- 
bald;  yet  is  he  clean. 

42  And  if  there  be  in  the  bald 
head,  or  bald  forehead,  a  white 
reddish  sore;  it  is  a  leprosy  sprung 
up  in  his  bald  liead,  or  his  bald 
forehead. 


linguished  from  others  by  the  term 
pnn  boliak,  from  the  Syriac  '  hohakj^  to 
he  while  or  shining.  The  word  is  used 
to  denote  a  cutaneous  eruption,  of  which 
Niebuhr  says, '  I  myself  saw  a  case  of 
the  Bohak  leprosy  in  a  Jew  at  Mocha. 
The  spots  ill  this  disease  are  of  unequal 
size.  Tliey  have  no  shining  appear- 
ance ;  nor  are  they  perceptibly  elevated 
above  the  skin  ;  and  they  do  not  change 
the  color  of  the  hair.  Their  color  is  an 
obscure  white,  or  somewhat  reddisli. 
The  rest  of  the  skin  of  this  patient  was 
blacker  than  that  of  the  people  of  the 
country  is  in  general ;  but  the  spots 
were  not  so  white  as  the  skin  of  an 
European,  when  not  sun-burnt.  The 
spots,  in  this  species  of  leprosy,  do  not 
appear  on  the  hands,  nor  about  the 
navel,  but  on  the  neck  and  face  ;  not, 
however,  on  that  part  of  the  head  where 
the  hair  grows  very  thick.  They  gra- 
dually spread,  and  continue  sometimes 
only  about  two  months ;  but  in  some 
cases,  indeed,  as  long  as  two  years,  and 
then  disappear,  by  degrees,  of  them- 
selves. This  disorder  is  neither  infec- 
tious nor  hereditary,  nor  does  it  occa- 
sion any  inconvenience.' 

Distinction  of  Leprosy  from  Baldness. 

40-44.     The  man  whose  hair  is  fallen 

off  his  headf  &c.    *  Another  description 


43  Then  the  priest  shall  look  up- 
on it:  and  behold,  if  the  rising  of 
the  sore  be  white  reddish  in  his 
bald  head,  or  in  his  bald  forehead, 
as  the  leprosy  appeareih  in  the 
skin  of  the  flesh ; 

44  He  is  a  leprous  man,  he  is  un- 
clean :  the  priest  shall  pronounce 
him  utterly  unclean;  his  plague  is 
in  his  head. 

45  And  the  leper  in  whom  the 
plague  is,  his  clothes  shall  be  rent, 
and  his  head  bare,  and  be  shall 
fput  a  covering  upon  his  upper 
lip,  and  shall  cry,  s  Unclean,  un- 
clean. 

f  Ezek,  24.  17.  22.  Mk.  3.  7.   S  Lam.  4-  15. 

of  persons,  for  whose  exemption  from 
the  charge  and  hardsliips  of  leprosy 
Moses  look  care  to  provide,  were  ihoss 
whose  heads  became  bald.  Among  us, 
and  indeed  in  any  country  where  leprosy 
is  not  extremely  prevalent,  such  persons 
require  no  such  attention  ;  for  nobody 
would  think  of  accounting  a  man  leprous 
because  his  head  happened  to  become 
prematurely  bald,  were  it  e-ven  in  the 
days  of  his  youth.  As,  however,  tl)e 
falling  of  the  hair  is  sometimes,  and  iu 
coftnection  with  other  symptoms,  a 
strong  criterion  of  leprosy,  and  as  there 
actually  is  a  particular  kind  of  leprosy, 
which  might,  perhaps,  even  then,  have 
been  observed  to  have  the  peculiarity 
of  being  limited  either  to  the  fore  or 
hind  part  of  the  head,  it  was  not  strange 
that  a  person  who  became  bald,  and 
more  especially  if  not  very  far  advanced 
in  years,  should  incur  the  suspicion  of 
being  leprous.  Now  in  such  cases,  we 
find  Moses  giving  an  explanation,  viz. 
that  if  no  farther  symptoms  were  found 
than  mere  baldness,  the  person  was  not 
to  lie  under  the  suspicion  of  leprosy,  but 
to  be  considered  as  clean.' — Michaelis 

Conduct  to  be  observed  by  Lepers. 

45.  The  leper  in  whom  the  plague  is, 
his  clothes  shall  be  rent.  The  leprous 
person  was  required  to  be  as  one  that 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


123 


46  All  the  days  wherein  the 
plague  shall  he  in  him  he  shall  be 
defiled  ;  he  is  unclean  :  he  shall 
dwell  alone,  h  without  the  camp 
shuU  his  habitation  be. 

47  H  The  garment  also  that  the 

h  Numb.  5.  2,  auJ  12.  14,  2  Kings  7.  3, 
and  15.  5.     2  Chron.  26.  21.    Luke  17.  12. 


mourned  for  the  dead,  or  for  some  great 
and  public  calaiiiilj'.  He  was  to  have 
his  clothes  rent  in  token  of  extreme 
.sorrow  ;  his  head  was  to  be  made  bare  ; 
the  ordinary  bonnet  or  turban  being 
omitted,  and  to  have  a  covering  upon 
(he  upper  lip  ;  or  rather,  as  the  original 
word  '  upper  lip'  is  witli  equal  proba- 
bility interpreted  of  the  whole  chin,  he 
was  to  have  the  lower  part  of  his  face 
bound  around  with  a  bandage,  leaving 
ihe  mouth  just  freedom  enough  to  maUe 
the  declaration,  unclean  !  unclean  ! 
which  uttered  from  lips  thus  muffled  up, 
must  iiave  been  sounded  forth  in  a 
peculiarly  doleful  accent.  The  reason 
of  uttering  this  cry  was  to  prevent  any 
per^on  from  coming  near  liim,  lost  de- 
iilement  might  be  incurred  by  contact. 
Th.-refore  the  Chal.  renders  it,  *  Be  yc 
not  made  unclean  !  be  ye  not  made  un- 
clean !'  and  Tar.  Jon.  '  Avoid !  avoid 
the  unclean  !'  In  allusion  to  this  it  is 
said.  Lam.  4.  15,  '  They  cried  unto 
them,  depart  ye  ;  (I  am)  unclean;  de- 
j.art,  depart,  touch  not,'  In  the  East 
lepers  are  not  at  this  day  absolutely  in- 
terdicted from  going  abroad,  for  they 
ire  not  considered  as  pestilential. 
Niebuhr  says, '  1  might  have  seen  num- 
bers of  them  ;  hut  whenever  I  observed 
any  of  them  meeting  me  in  the  streets, 
I  deemed  it  prudent  to  avoid  them.' 

46.  He  shall  dwell  alone  ;  without  the 
camp  shall  his  habitation  be.  Heb. 
liT""  "n^  bcldad  yisheb,  he  shall  sit 
alone.  Gr.  «£xwpt(7/ji£i/oj  KaOnaerai^  he 
shall  sit  separated.  This  was  a  salutary 
precaution  for  the  sake  of  the  sound, 
and  the  temporary  seclusion  might 
easily  be  turned  to  a  -useful  account 
to  tlie   leper   himself ;    for  there   was 


plague  of  leprosy  is  in,  whether  it 
be  a  woollen  garment,  or  a  linen 
garment ; 

48  Whether  it  be  in  the  warp,  or 
woof,  of  linen,  or  of  woollen :  Avhe- 
ther  in  a  skin,  or  in  any  thing 
made  of  skin: 

49  And  if  the  plague  be  greenish 

every  thing  in  his  condition  calculated 
to  admonish  him  of  his  moral  defile- 
ment, and  prompt  him  to  seek  for  an 
effectual  cleansing  of  that  inner  malady 
which  was  so  strikingly  set  forth  by  the 
loathsome  leprosy  tliut  covered  his 
body.  The  law  here  enacted  seems  to 
have  been  strictly  observed.  So  early 
as  the  second  year  of  the  Exodus,  lepers 
were  obliged  to  reside  without  the  camp, 
Numb.  5.  1-4  ;  and  so  strictly  was  this 
law  enforced,  that  the  sister  of  Moses 
himself  becoming  leprous,  was  expelled 
from  it.  Numb.  12.  14-16.  When  the 
Israelites  came  into  their  own  land, 
and  lived  in  cities,  the  spirit  of  the  law 
thus  far  operated,  that  lepers  were 
obliged  to  reside  in  a  separate  place, 
which  was  called  r"i""L;i;n  V\^'2  beth 
'hophshith,  the  house  of  uncleanness  ; 
and  from  this  seclusion,  not  even  kings, 
when  they  became  leprous,  were  ex- 
empted, 2  Kings  15.  5. 

The  Leprosy  of  Garments. 
47.  The  garment  also  that  the  plague 
of  leprosy  is  in.  This  leprosy  in  gar- 
ments appears  so  strange  to  us,  that  it 
has  induced  some  to  consider  it  as  an 
extraordinary  punishment  inflicted  by 
God  upon  the  Israelites,  as  a  sign  of 
his  displeasure  against  sin  ,  while  others 
consider  the  leprosy  in  clothes,  as  also 
in  houses,  as  having  no  relation  to  the 
leprosy  in  man.  Indeed,  the  probability 
is  that  the  term  '  leprosy,'  in  this  con- 
nexion,  is  not  intended  to  be  used  in  the 
same  sense  in  which  it  is  applied  to  de- 
note  a  disease  affecting  the  human  sys- 
tem, but  has  rather  a  figurative  import, 
just  as  '  cancer  '  is  used  by  agricultur- 
ists in  reference  to  a  disease  of  trees. 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


or  reddish  in  the  garment,  or  in 
the  skin,  either  in  the  warp,  or  in 
the  woof,  or  in  any  thing  of  skin  ; 
it  IS  a  plague  of  leprosy,  and  shall 
be  slioAved  unto  the  priest: 

and  as,  inversely,  the  word  'rot'  is 
applied  to  a  disease  of  sheep,  though 
primitively  used  of  the  decomposition 
of  limber.  The  language  was  no  doubt 
intended  to  intimate  that  the  garment 
was  fretted  by  a  process  similar  to  that 
which  takes  place  in  the  skin  in  a  case 
of  real  leprosy,  occasioned  in  all  likeli- 
hood, by  a  species  of  animalcula  or  ver- 
min, wliich  by  breeding  in  the  g.irments 
must  necessarily  multiply  their  kind, 
am]  fret  the  threads,  i.  e.  corrode  a  por- 
tion of  the  finer  parts  after  the  manner 
of  moths,  for  their  nourishment.  It  is 
thus  that  the  human  skin  is  affected  in 
llie  iich,  a  disease  caused  by  the  psora, 
or  itch  animal,  which  is  often  commu- 
nicated from  garments.  This  plague 
of  vestments  is  termed,  v.  61,  a  '  fret- 
ting (or  raiikling)  leprosy,'  a  word 
which  is  applied  in  Ezek.2S.  24,  to  a 
'pricking'  or  'rankling  brier,'  and  is 
strikingly  expressive  of  the  sensation 
produced  by  the  irritating  effect  of  the 
itch  in  the  human  subject.  We  may 
suppose,  moreover,  that  the  metaphori- 
cal term  '  leprosy  '  was  used  in  this 
connexion  on  account  of  the  disgusting 
ideas  which,  by  association  with  the 
human  disease,  the  view  of  a  blemish  in 
clothing,  called  also  '  leprosy,'  would 
excite  in  the  mind.  So  much  in  respect 
to  the  term.  As  to  the  fact  indicated 
by  it,  the  inquiries  of  Michaelis  on  the 
subject  have  brought  out  the  following 
results,  which  are  well  worth  trans- 
cribing in  his  own  words.  '  The  leprosy 
of  clothes  is  described  as  consisting  of 
green  or  reddish  spots,  that  remain  in 
spite  of  washing,  and  still  spread  ;  and 
by  which  the  cloth  becomes  bald  or 
bare,  sometimes  on  the  one  side,  some- 
limes  on  the  other.  This  Moses  terms 
dropping  or  losing  the  hair  ;  that  is,  if 
we  are  to  eive  the  literal  truth  of  the 


50  And  the  priest  "shall  look  upon 
the  plague,  and  shut  up  it  that  hath 
the  plague  seven  days: 

51  And  he  shall  look  on  the 
plague  on  the  seventh  day:  if  the 

Hebrew  text,  in  a  passage  which  might 
have  its  difficulties  to  a  man  of  learning, 
if  he  knew  nothing  of  the  manufacture 
of  woollen.  These  symptoms,  too,  of 
leprosj',  are  said  to  be  found  sometimes 
only  in  the  warp,  and  at  other  limes 
only  in  the  icoof.  To  a  person  who  has 
nothing  to  do  with  the  manufactures  of 
woollen,  linen,  or  leather,  but  with 
books  only,  this  must  doubtless  be  ob. 
}  scure  ;  or,  at  most,  he  will  be  led  to 
think  of  specks  of  rottenness,  but  still 
without  being  rightly  satisfied.  I  have 
not  been  able  to  obtain  complete  infor- 
mation on  this  subject  ;  but  in  regard  to 
wool,  and  woolen  stuffs,  I  have  consult- 
ed the  greatest  manufacturer  in  the 
electorate  of  Hanover  ;  and  he  informs 
me,  that  what  he  has  read  in  my  Ger- 
man Bible,  at  this  passage,  will  be 
found  to  hold  good,  at  any  rate  with 
regard  to  woollen  articles  ;  and  that  it 
proceeds  from  what  is  called  dead  wool, 
that  is,  the  wool  of  sheep  that  have  died 
by  disease,  not  by  the  knife  :  that  such 
wool,  if  the  disease  has  been  but  of 
short  duration,  is  not  altogether  useless, 
but  in  a  sheep  that  has  Keen  long  dis- 
eased, becomes  extremely  bad,  and 
loses  the  points  ;  and  that,  according 
to  the  established  usage  of  honest  manu- 
facturers. It  is  unfair  to  manufacture 
dead  wool  into  any  article  worn  by 
man ;  because  vermin  are  so  apt  to 
establish  themselves  in  it,  particularly 
when  it  is  worn  close  to  the  body  and 
warmed  thereby.  When  I  told  him, 
that  in  the  countries,  with  a  view  to 
which  I  questioned  him,  the  people,  for 
want  of  linen  and  from  poverty,  had 
always  worn,  and  still  v/ear,  woollen 
stuffs  next  the  skin,  he  stated  it  as  his 
opinion  that  there  the  disagreeable 
effect  just  mentioned,  must  take  place 
in  a  still  higher  degree  than  in  countries 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


123 


plague  be  spread  in  the  garment, 
either  in  the  warp,  or  in  the  woof, 
or  in  a  skin,  or  in  any  work  that 
is  made  of  skin  :  the  plague  is  i  a 
fretting  leprosy;  it  is  unclean. 

52  He  shall  therefore  burn  that 
garment,  whether  warp  or  woof, 
in  woollen  or  in  linen,  or  any  thing 
of  skin,  wherein  the  plague  is:  for 
it  IS  ci  fretting  leprosy;  it  shall  be 
hurnt  in  the  tire. 

53  And  if  the  priest  shall  look, 
and  behold,  the  plague  be  not 
spread  in  the  garment,  either  in 
tne  warp  or  in  the  woof,  or  in  any 
thing  of  skin ; 

54  Then  the  priest  shall  command 
that  they  wash  the  thing  wherein 
ihe  plague  is,  and  he  shall  shut  it 
up  ^even  days  more  : 

55  And  the  priest  shall  look  on 
ihe  plague  after  that  it  is  washed  : 
and  behold,  tf  the  plafjue  have  not 
changed  his  colour,  and  the  plague 
be  nut  spread;  it  is  unclean  ;  thou 
siiak  burn  it  in   tjie  fire;  it  is  fret 


[  inward,  whether  it  be  bare  within 
or  without. 

56  And  if  the  priest  look,  and  be- 
hold, the  plague  be  somewhat  dark 
after  the  washing  of  it;  then  he 
shall  send  it  out  of  the  garment, 
or  out  of  the  skin,  or  out  of  the 
warp,  or  out  of  the  woof: 

57  And  if  it  appear  still  in  the 
garment,  either  in  the  warp,  or  in 
the  woof,  or  in  any  thing  of  skin  ; 
it  is  a  spreading  plague  :  thou 
shalt  burn  that  wherein  the  plague 
is  with  fire. 

58  And  the  garment,  either  warp, 
or  woof,  or  whatsoever  thing  of 
skin  it  be,  which  thou  shalt  wash, 
if  the  plague  be  departed  from 
them,  then  it  shall  be  washed  the 
second  time,  and  shall  be  clean. 

59  This  zs  the  law  of  the  plague 
of  leprosy  in  a  garment  of  woollen 
or  linen,  either  in  the  warp  or 
woof,  or  any  thing  of  skins,  to  pro- 
nounce it  clean,  or  to  pronounce  it 
unclean. 


uliere,  according  to  our  German  fashion, 
wliicli  would  there  be  a  luxury,  a  linen 
^l;lrl  is  worn  between  the  woollen 
clothes  and  llie  body.  He  added,  that 
dead  wool  was  usually  manufactured 
into  saqks  and  horse-clolhs ;  and  he 
expressed  his  wish  for  a  statute,  in  the 
style  of  Moses,  which  should  discourage 
Ihe  use  of  dead  wool,  or  inflict  a  pun- 
islnnent  on  those  who  either  sold  it,  or 
knowingly  manufaclured  it  into  liuman 
cluihuig. — I  ain  likewise  informed  by 
IJaiiibur^hers,  that  in  their  neiglibor- 
hood,  many  frauds  are  committed  with 
dead  wool,  from  its  being  sold  for  good 
wool  ;  in  consequence  of  which,  the 
stuffs  made  of  it  not  only  become  very 
soon  bare,  but  full  first  oi'  little  depres- 
sions, and  llien  of  holes.' — Comment, 
071  L.  M.  Art.2\\. 

Remarks. — (2.)    Nothing    that    en- 
tered into  the  Leviiiciil  system,  which  ' 


we  are  now  considering,  was  more  re- 
markably fraught  with  symbolical  im- 
port than  the  portion  concerning  the 
treatment  of  the  leper.  Other  parts  of 
tlie  ritual  taught  impressively  \\ie  fear- 
ful effects  of  sin  ;  this  taught  its  defil' 
ing  nature.  No  conceivable  aflliclion 
or  disease  could  form  so  striking  a  re- 
presentation of  that  moral  malady  which 
has  befiillen  our  nature.  We  see  in  the 
leprosy  a  lively  emblem  of  that  universal 
depravity  v.  hich  has  corrupted  our  souls. 
Tlie  effects  of  this  deadly  spiritual  de- 
filement are  typically  set  Ibrth  in  lively 
colors  in  the  enactments  belbre  us.  He 
upon  whom  it  appeared  was  put  out  of 
the  camp  or  city  in  which  he  dwelt, 
and  was  forced  to  live  alone,  cut  off' 
from  all  social  intercourse.  So  with 
sin.  It  does  not  indeed  literally  shut 
us  out  from  the  society  of  our  fellow- 
creatures,  but  it  renders  us  odious  m 
the  sight  of  God,  separates  between  us 


126 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 
ND  the  Loud  spake  unto  Mo- 

.  ses,  saying, 


and  him,  precludes  us  from  all  cordial 
fellowship  wilh  his  people,  and  unless 
we  he  cleansed  from  it  in  the  appointed 
way,  it  will  effectually  forbid  our  en- 
trance into  his  heavenly  temple.  The 
unpiirified  and  unrenewed  sinner  is  mor- 
ally unclean,  and  has  no  spiritual  health 
in  him  ;  he  is  without  God  and  without 
Christ  in  the  world ;  and  from  the  very 
necessity  of  his  corrupt  nature,  he  is 
excluded  from  the  privileges  and  bless- 
ings of  God's  people.  When  king 
Uzziah  was  smitten  with  the  leprosy  in 
the  temple,  all  the  priests  with  one 
accord  rose  upon  him,  and  '  thrust  him 
out'  of  the  temple;  yea,  he  himself 
also  '  hasted  to  go  out.'  And  thus  it 
would  be  in  heaven,  if  by  any  means  an 
unrenewed  sinner  were  admitted  there  ; 
he  would  be  '  thrust  out,'  as  unworthy 
of  a  place  in  that  pure  abode;  and  he 
would  no  doubt  haste  to  flee  out,  from 
a  consciousness  of  the  same  fact. 

(2.)  Upon  the  smallest  appearance  of 
the  leprosy,  the  subject  of  it  was  to 
subject  himself  to  instant  examination. 
He  must  not  trust  to  his  own  judgment, 
but  must  apply  to  those  whom  God  had 
authorized  to  determine  the  point,  ac- 
cording to  the  rules  prescribed.  If  this 
could  not  be  done  at  once,  more  time 
was  taken,  till  the  fact  became  evident. 
What  does  this  show  to  us,  but  that  we 
must  take  every  means  of  discovering 
the  phigue-spol  of  our  own  hearts? 
We  must  not  be  afraid  of  knowing  the 
worst.  We  must  have  recourse  to  the 
word  and  to  the  ministers  of  the  word, 
that  by  their  help  we  may  know  the 
evil  that  is  in  us.  Above  all,  we  must 
go  to  GofI,  who  searcheth  the  heart, 
and  trieih  llie  reins,  and  say,  'Search 
me,  0  God,  and  know  my  heart  ;  try 
me,  and  know  my  thoughts.'  However 
clear  we  may  be  in  our  own  eyes,  we 
must  say  wilh  Paul,  '  I  judge  not  mine 
own  self;  for  I  know  nothing  by  myself 


2  This  shall  be  the  law  of  the 
leper  in  the  day  of  his  cleansing  : 


(i.  6.  against  myself)  ;  yet  am  I  not 
hereby  justified,  but  he  that  justifieth 
me  is  the  Lord.' 

(6.)  '  The  priest  shall  pronounce  him 
clean.'  But  why  not  pronounce  him 
cured  ?  The  fact  is,  there  was  nothing 
prescribed,  nor  any  thing  to  be  attempt- 
ed by  way  of  cure  lor  this  disease. 
Hence  the  removal  of  it  is  generally 
expressed  by  the  w'ord  cleansing.  And 
certain  it  is,  in  like  manner,  that  none 
but  God  can  deliver  us  from  sin.  No 
self-righteous  works,  no  superstitious 
devices,  no  human  efforts,  have  ever 
been  able  to  expel  it  out  of  the  soil  of 
the  depraved  heart.  The  blood  of 
Christ  alone  can  avail  to  this  ;  and  then 
it  is  not  in  this  life  eradicated,  but  /or- 
gifen,just  as  the  Jewish  leper  is  not 
said  to  have  been  cured,  but  cleansed, 
as  though  the  idea  of  the  defilement  were 
more  prominent  in  the  mind  of  the  law- 
giver than  that  of  the  disease, 

(45.)  '  Shall  cry.  Unclean,  unclean  !' 
Who  does  not  see  in  this  the  manner  in 
which  we  are  to  acknowledge  and  be- 
wail the  corruption  of  our  nature  ? 
Who  does  not  recognize  the  fitting  ex- 
pression of  a  gospel  penitent,  convinced 


of 


Does  he  not  feel  the  profound- 


est  grief  and  shame?  Does  he  not  ac- 
knowledge himself  a  miserable  and  pol- 
luted  sinner?  So  if  u-e  are  made  truly 
sensible  of  our  own  sinful  condition,  we 
shall  rend  our  hearts,  and  not  our  gar- 
ments ;  we  shall  lay  our  souls  bare 
before  the  heart-searching  God ;  our 
mouths  will  be  stopped,  for  we  shall 
know  ourselves  to  be  guilly  ;  we  shall 
smite  each  one  upon  our  breast,  and  cry, 
'  God  be  merciful  to  me  a  sinner  !' 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

The   Law  of  the  Purification  of  the 

Leper. 

2.  This  shall  be  the  law  of  the  leper, 

&c.     That  is,  this  is  the  mode  which 


B.  C.  1490.1 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


127 


He  a  shall   be   brought    unto   the 
priest  : 

3  And   the  priest  shall   go  forth 
out  of  the  camp :  and  the  priest 


a  Matt.  8.   2.  4.     Mark  1.  40,  44. 
12,  14,  and  17.  14. 


Luke 


God  hath  ordained  for  cleansing  a  leper, 
or  qualifying  him  to  be  pronounced 
clean,  and  liius  restored  to  the  commu- 

uion  of  God's  people. ^  He  shall  be 

brought  unto  the  priest.  He  was  to  be 
conducted  from  his  '  several  (separate) 
house,'  to  the  borders  of  the  camp, 
whither  the  priest  was  to  go  forth  to 
meet  him,  and  to  perform  the  requisite 
examination.  As  this  coming  to  the 
priest  was  required  of  the  leper  in  every 
instance,  however  thoroughly  he  might 
have  been  healed,  therefore,  our  Savior 
said  to  the  leper  whom  he  had  healed, 
Malt.  8.  4,  '  Go  show  thyself  to  the 
priest,  and  offer  the  gift  that  Moses 
commanded.' 

4.  Then  shall  the  priest  command  to 
take  for  h im ,  &c.  Heb.  np^l  'P-n  m^Z 
tzivvdh  hakkoh'Cn  ve-lakah,  and  the 
priest  shall  command,  and  he  shall  take  ; 
i.  e.  the  leper  shall  take.  It  was  pro- 
bably in  order  to  avoid  ambiguity  as  to  | 
the  person,  that  our  translators  adopted 
the  mode  of  rendering  which  appears  in 
the  text.  Of  the  cedar  wood,  hyssop, 
clean  bird,  and  scarlet  wool,  were  made 
an  instrument  to  sprinkle  with.  The 
cedar  served  for  the  iiandle,  the  hyssop 
and  living  bird  were  attached  to  it,  by 
means  of  the  scarlet  wool  or  crimson 
fillet.  The  bird  was  so  bound  to  this 
handle,  as  that  its  tail  should  be  down- 
wards, in  order  to  he  dipt  into  the  blood 
of  the  bird  that  !idd  been  killed.  By 
this  means  the  blood  was  sprinkled,  and 
when  this  was  done,  the  living  bird  was 
let  loose  and  permitted  to  go  wliiiher- 
soever  it  would.  The  general  purport 
of  the  ceremonies  liere  prescribed,  was 
to  point  out  the  purification  of  tlie  soul 
through  the  atonement  and  spirit  of 
Christ,  but  it  is  vain  to  attempt  to  fix 
with  auy  positiveness  the  spiritual  im- 


shall  look,  and  behold,  ?/ the  plague 
of  leprosy  be  healed  in  the  leper ; 
4  Then  shall  the  priest  command 
to  lake  for  him  that  is  to  be  cleansed 
two    birds  alive   and   clean,  and 


port  of  each  particular  rite.  Yet  it  may 
not  be  amiss  to  give  the  explanation  of 
R.  Abarbanel  who  imagines  that  these 
four  tilings  had  reference  by  contrast  to 
the  four  evils  under  which  he  had  la- 
bored, and  from  which  by  his  cure  he 
was  del  ivered.  The  living  bird  denoted, 
according  to  him,  that  the  dead  fiesh 
was  restored  to  its  wonted  life  and 
vigor  ;  the  cedar  wood,  which  is  not 
easily  corrupted,  that  the  rottenness 
and  corruption  produced  by  the  leprosy 
was  cured,  and  his  flesh  become  sound 
and  healliiy  ;  the  scarlet  wool,  that  his 
blood,  by  being  cleansed  of  its  impuri- 
ties, had  again  sssumed  its  florid  hue, 
and  given  new  fresh7iess  and  bloom  to 
the  complexion  ;  and  the  hyssop,  a 
strongly  odoriferous  plant,  that  the  ill 
savor  and  every  other  species  of  offen- 
siveness  pertaining  to  the  disease,  had 

passed    away. IT  Tivo   birds    alive. 

Heb.  fi'^'^l*:;!  tzipporim,  rendered  in 
the  margin  sparrows,  as  it  is  also  by 
Jerome  and  many  other  interpreters. 
But  it  is  evident  from  an  attentive  pe- 
rusal of  the  verse,  that  it  signifies  birds 
in  general ;  for  if  the  sparrow  was  a 
clean  bird,  there  could  be  no  use  in 
commanding  a  clean  one  to  be  taken, 
since  every  one  of  the  species  was  cere- 
monially clean;  but  if  it  was  unclean 
by  law,  then  it  could  not  be  called  clean. 
The  term  here  must  therefore  signify 
birds  in  general,  of  which  some  were 
ceremotiially  clean,  and  some  unclean  ; 
which  rendered  the  specification  in  the 
command  proper  and  necessary.  From 
the  terms  of  the  law  it  appears,  that 
any  species  of  clean  birds  miglu  be  taken 
on  such  occasions,  domestic  or  wild ; 
provided  only  they  were  clean,  and  the 
use  of  them  conceded  by  the  laws  of 
Moses  to  the  people-    Accordingly  the 


128 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


b  cedar-wood,  and  « scarlet,  and 
<J  hyssop. 

5  And  the  priest  shall  command 
that  one  of  the  birds  be  killed  in 
an  earthen  vessel,  over  running 
water. 

6  As  for  the  living  bird,  he  shall 
take  it,  and  the  cedar-wood,  and 
the  scarlet,  and  the  hyssop,  and 
shall  dip  them,  and  the  living  bird, 
in  the  blood  of  the  bird  that  teas 
killed  over  the  running  water. 

7  And  he  shall  e  sprinkle  upon 
him  that  is  to  be  cleansed  from 
the  leprosy  f  seven  times,  and  shall 

f)ronounce  him  clean,  and  shall 
et  the  living  bird  loose  into  the 
open  field. 

S  And  he  that  is  to  be  cleansed 
g  shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  shave 
off  all  his  hair,  hand  wash  himself 
in  water,  that  he  may  be  clean  : 

b  Xumb.  19.  G.  c  Heb.  9.  19.  d  Ps.  51.  7. 
e  Heb  9.  13.  f  2  Kings  5,  10,  11.  S  ch.  13.  6. 
hch.  11.25. 

Gr.  renders  it  very  properly  c^uo  opvtdia, 

two  Utile  birds. IT  And  scarlet.   That 

is,  a  lock  of  wool  which  had  been  dyed 

in  purple  or  scarlet  dye. IT  Hyssop. 

See  Note  on  Ex.  12.  22. 

5.  Killed  in  an  earthen  vessel,  over 
running  water.  The  question  will 
here  very  naturally  occur,  how  the  bird 
could  properly  be  said  to  be  killed  over 
*  running'  water,  wlien  it  was  to  be  at 
the  same  time  in  an  'earthen  vessel.' 
But  the  apparent  discrepancy  is  removed 
at  once  when  we  remark,  thai,  the  phrase 
in  the  original  is  tl'^'^n  tl'^?^  mayiTn 
hayim,  living  water,  and  that  nothing 
more  is  meant  than  that  the  bird  was  to 
be  killed  over  an  earthen  vessel  partly 
filled  with  fresh,  spring,  or  living  water, 
in  opposition  to  that  which  had  been 
employed  for  any  other  (jurpose,  or  was 
stale  from  long  standing.  And  so 
wherever  the  same  epithet  occurs  else- 
where in  the  present  chapter. IT  Shall 

let  the  living  bird  loose  into  the  open 
field.      Porhajis   to   intimate   symboli- 


and  after  that  he  shall  come  into 
the  camp,  and  >  shall  tarry  abroad 
out  of  his  tent  seven  days. 

9  But  it  shall  be  on  the  seventh 
day,  that  he  shall  shave  all  his  hair 
off  his  head,  and  his  beard,  and  his 
eye-brows,  even  all  his  hair  he 
shall  shave  off;  and  he  shall  wash 
his  clothes,  also  he  shall  wash  his 
flesh  in  water,  and  he  shall  be  clean. 

10  And  on  the  eighth  day  khe 
shall  take  two  he-lambs  without 
blemish,  and  one  ewe-lamb  of  the 
first  year  without  blemish,  and 
three  tenth-deals  of  fine  flour  for 
la  meat-offering,  mingled  with  oil, 
and  one  log  of  oil. 

11  And  the  priest  that  maketh 
h??n  clean,  shall  present  the  man 
that  is  to  be  made  clean,  and  those 
things,  before  the  Lord,  at  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation. 

i  Numb.  12. 15.  k  Matt.  8.  4.  Mark  1.  44. 
Luke  5.  14.      1  ch.  2.  1.     Numb.  15.  4.  15. 


cally,  that  the  leper  was  now  released 
from  his  confinement,  and'restored  to 
free  intercourse  with  society,  as  the 
scape-bird  was  to  the  rest  of  its  kind. 

The  Offering  required  to  be  brought 
fur  his  further  cleansing. 
10.  And  on  the  eighth  day  he  shall 
take  two  he-lambs,  &c.  After  having 
submitted  to  the  seven  days'  restriction, 
or  quarantine,  in  the  manner  prescribed 
above,  the  recovered  leper  was  required, 
on  the  day  immediately  succeeding,  to 
bring,  in  order  to  complete  his  purifica- 
tion, a  trespass,  a  sin,  and  a  burnt-offer- 
ing ; — a  male  lamb  for  each  of  the  for- 
mer, and  a  female  for  the  latter.  An- 
nexed  to  each  he  was  to  present  a  meal 
offering,  consisting  of  an  omer  of  flour 
with  oil  to  make  it  into  bn'ad  or  cakes, 
and  another  log,  or  half  pint  of  oil,  by 

I  itself,  for  another  purpose,    v.  15.  16. 
As  the  accompanying  ceremonies  were 

;  substantially  tlie  same  with  those  al- 
ready detailed  in  pieceding  chapters,  it 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


1S9 


12  And  the  priest  shall  take  one 
he-lamb,  and  m  offer  him  for  a 
trespass-offering,  and  the  log  of 
oil,  and  n  wave  them  for  a  wave- 
offering  before  the  Lord. 

i:^  And  he  shall  slay  the  lamb 
0  in  the  place  where  he  shall  kill 
the  sin-offering  and  the  burn  [-offer- 
ing, in  the  holy  place  :  for  p  as  the 
sin-offering  is  the  priest's,  so  is  the 
trespass-offering:  qit  is  most  holy. 

14  And  the  priest  shall  take  some 
of  the  blood  of  the  trespass-offer- 
ing, and  the  priest  shall  put  it 
r  upon  the  tip  of  the  right  ear  of 
him  that  is  to  be  cleansed,  and 
upon  the  thumb  of  his  right  hand, 
and  upon  the  great  toe  of  his  right 
foot. 

15  And  the  priest  shall  take  some 
of  the  log  of  oil,  and  pour  it  into 
the  palm  of  his  own  left  hand  : 

16  And  the  priest  shall  dip  his 
right  finger  in  the  oil  that  is  in  his 
left  hand,  and  shall  sprinkle  of  the 
oil  with  his  finger  seven  limes  be- 
fore the  Lord. 

17  And  of  the  rest  of  the  oil  that 
is  in  his  hand,  shall  the  priest  put 
upon  the  tip  of  the  right  ear  of  him 
that  is  to  be  cleansed,  and  upon 
the  thumb  of  his  right  hand,  and 

m  ch.  5.  2,  18,  and  6.  6,  7.  n  Exod.  -29.  24. 
o  Exod.  29.  11.  ch.  1.  6,  11,  and  4  4,  24. 
P  ch.  7.  7.  q  ch.  2.  3,  and  7.  6,  and  21.  22. 
-  Exod.  29.  20.     ch.  8.  23. 

will  be  unnecessary  to  dwell  upon  the 
various  particulars.  For  these  the 
reader  can  consult  Ainsworth  or  Patrick. 
14,  The  priest  shall  put  it  upon  the 
tip  of  his  risht  ear,  &c.  Probably  to 
denote,  by  this  significant  act,  that  now 
his  .sin  being  graciously  remitted,  and 
he  received  again  into  communion  with 
his  people,  he  was  laid  under  fresh  ob- 
ligatidn  to  hearken  heedfully  to  the 
divine  commands,  and  to  render  a  more 
active  and  strenuous  service  to  his 
heavenly  Benefactor.  See  Note  on  Ex. 
29.  20,  where  this  ceremony  in  refer- 
ence to  the  priests  is  fully  explained. 


upon  the  great  toe  of  his  right  foot, 
upon  the  blood  of  the  trespass-of- 
fering. 

18  And  the  remnant  of  the  oil 
that  is  in  the  priest's  hand  he  shall 
pour  upon  the  head  of  him  that  is 
to  be  cleansed:  sand  the  priest 
shall  make  an  atonement  for  him 
before  the  Lord. 

19  And  the  priest  shall  offer  t  the 
sin-offering,  and  make  an  atone- 
ment for  him  that  is  to  be  cleansed 
from  his  uncleanness  ;  and  after- 
ward he  shall  kill  the  burnt- 
offering. 

20  And  the  priest  shall  offer  the 
burnt-offering,  and  the  meat-offer- 
ing upon  the  altar:  and  the  priest 
shall  make  an  atonement  for  him, 
and  he  shall  be  clean. 

21  And  u  if  he  ie  poor,  and  cannot 
get  so  much ;  then  he  shall  take 
one  lamb/or  a  trespass-offering  to 
be  waved,  to  make  an  atonement 
for  him,  and  one  tenth-deal  of  fine 
flour  mingled  with  oil  for  a  meat- 
offering, and  a  log  of  oil ; 

22  wAnd  two  turtle-doves,  or  two 
young  pigeons,  such  as  he  is  able 
to  get ;  and  the  one  shall  be  a  sin- 
offering,  and  the  other  a  burnt- 
offering. 

23  X  And  he  shall  bring  them  on 

s  ch.  4,  26.  t  ch.  5.  1,  6,  and  12.  7.  u  ch. 
5.  7,  and  12.  8.     w  ch.  12.  8,  and   15.   14,   15. 


Commutation  of  Offerings  appointed 
for  the  Poor. 

21,22.  If  he  be  poor,  and  cannot  get 
so  much.  Heb.  r.5!:j?2  "l"!"'  'I'^X  ain 
yado  massegeth,  his  hand  attain  it  not ; 
an  idiom  occasionally  elsewhere  occur- 
ring, and  indicating  uant  of  ability,  as 
below,  v.  22,  30,  31.  Lev.  27.  S.  On 
the  provision  itself  see  the  remarks  in 
the  Note  on  Lev.  5.  7. 

23-32.  And  he  shall  bring  them,  kc. 
The  same  circumstances  and  ceremonies 
were  to  mark  the  offering  of  the  poor 
leper  as  of  the  rich.    His  lamb  was  to 


130 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


the  eighth  day  for  his  cleansing  ' 
unio  the  priest,  unto  the  door  of 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation, 
before  the  Lord. 

24  y  And  the  priest  shall  take  the 
lamb  of  the  trespass-offering,  and 
the  log  of  oil,  and  the  priest  shall 
v;ave  them  for  a  wave-otlering 
before  the  Lord. 

25  And  he  shall  kill  the  lamb  of 
the  trespass-offering,  ^  and  the 
priest  shall  take  5o?ne  of  the  blood 
of  the  trespass-offering,  and  put  it 
upon  the  tip  of  the  right  ear  of  him 
that  is  to  be  cleansed,  and  upon 
the  thumb  of  his  right  hand,  and 
upon  the  great  toe  of  his  right  foot. 

26  And  the  priest  shall  pour  of 
the  oil  into  the  palm  of  his  own 
left  hand. 

27  And  the  priest  shall  sprinkle 
with  his  right  finger  some  of  the  oil 
that  IS  in  his  left  hand  seven  times 
before  the  Lord: 

28  And  the  priest  shall  put  of  the 
oil  that  IS  in  his  hand,  upon  the  tip 
of  the  right  ear  of  him  that  is  to 
be  cleansed,  and  upon  the  thumb 
of  his  right  hand,  and  upon  the 

y  ver.  1-2.     z  ver.  14. 


great  toe  of  his  right  foot,  upon  the 
place  of  the  blood  of  the  trespass- 
offering. 

29  And  the  rest  of  the  oil  that  is 
in  the  priest's  hand,  he  shall  put 
upon  the  head  of  him  that  is  to  be 
cleansed,  to  make  an  atonement 
for  him  before  the  Lord. 

30  And  he  shall  offer  the  one  of 
a  the  turtle-doves,  or  of  the  young 
pigeons,  such  as  he  can  get ; 

31  Even  such  as  he  is  able  to  get, 
i  the  one  for  a  sin-offering,  and  the 
[  other/or  a  burnt-offering,  with  the 

meat-offering.  And  the  priest  shall 
make  an  atonement  for  him  that 
is  to  be  cleansed,  before  the  Lord. 

32  This  is  the  law  of  him  in 
whom  IS  the  plague  of  leprosy, 
whose  hand  is  not  able  to  get  ^that 
xchich  perlainelh  to  his  cleansing. 

33  %  And  the  Lord  spake  uuto 
Moses  and  unto  Aaron,  saying, 

34  c  When  ye  be  come  into  the 
land  of  Canaan,  which  I  give  to 
you  for  a  possession,  and  I  put  the 
plague  of  leprosy  in  a  house  of  the 
land  of  your  possession; 

a  ver.  '-22.  ch.  15.  15.  b  ver.  10.  =  Gen. 
17.  18.     Numb.  32.  22.    Deut.  7.  1,  and  32. 49 


be  waved  ;  its  blood  smeared  upoa  his 
ear,  thumb,  and  toe ;  which  were  also 
to  be  anointed  with  the  oil  out  of  the 
log  ;  and  his  turtle  and  pigeon  offered 
to  the  same  efTect,  and  with  like  avail- 
ableness  as  in  the  foregoing  cases. 

The  Detection  and  Cleansing  of  Lepro- 
sy in  Houses. 
34.  When — I pvt  the  plague  of  lepro- 
sy in  a  house,  &c.  This  language  would 
appear  at  first  blush  to  countenance  the 
idea  generally  entertained  by  the  Jews, 
that  tlie  leprosy  was  a  supernatural  dis- 
ease, inflicted  immediatt-ly  by  God 
himself.  But  in  the  Hebrew  idiom  God 
is  often  said  to  do  what,  in  the  course 
of  his  providence,  he  merely  perrnils  to 
be  done.  '  The  house-leprosy  here  de- 
scribed has  occasioned  much  perplexity 


to  inquirers  ;  and  the  difficulty  has  pro- 
bably arisen  from  being  led  by  the  name 
to  look  upon  this  '  leprosy,'  as  well  as 
that  in  clothes,  as  something  akin  to 
the  liuman  disease  so  called.  Men, 
clothes,  and  stones  have  not  the  same 
diseases,  but  from  some  analogous  cir- 
cumstances, real  or  fanciful,  the  dis- 
eases  of  men  may  be,  and  have  been,  by 
a  figure  of  speech,  applied  to  diseases 
in  other  tl)ings.  Indeed,  to  this  day, 
tliere  are  certain  disorders  of  trees  in 
Egypt  and  Palestine  to  wliich  the  name 
ol  *  leprosy  '  is  given.  In  Switzerland, 
also,  they  speak  of  a  cancer  in  build' 
i7igs  on  the  same  principle  ;  and  wliy 
should  we  not  understand  ihe  leprosy  in 
buildings  of  the  present  text  as  some- 
thing of  a  similar  description  ?  If  we 
believe  that  the  house-leprosy  was  any 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


131 


thing  related  to  the  disorder  of  the 
same  name  in  man,  it  is  extremely  diffi- 
cult to  account  for  the  symptoms  and 
mode  of  ireatnjent,  and  we  cannot  per- 
haps do  better  than  agree  with  the  Rab- 
bins and  some  of  the  early  Christian 
fathers,  who  believed  that  this  leprosy 
H-as  not  natural,  but  was  sent  by  God  as 
m  extraordinary  punishment  upon  evil- 
doers, to  compel  liiem  to  the  public 
acknowledgment  and  atonement  of  some 
undetected  crime,  wliereby  others  had 
been  injured.  Calmel,  however,  seems 
to  think  tliat  tiiis  disorder  was  caused 
by  animalcula,  v^hich  eroded  the  stone 
like  riiites  in  a  cheese,  and  might  then 
be  called  leprosy,  because,  according  to 
his  theory,  the  disorder  of  that  name  in 
man  and  in  clothes  was  produced  in 
much  the  same  manner.  (See  the  Dis- 
sertation prefixed  to  his  Commentary 
on  Leviticus.)  There  is  another  way 
of  accounting  for  its  connexion  with 
human  leprosy,  which  is,  by  supposing 
that  the  walls  had  taken  a  leprous  con- 
tagion from  man,  and  were  in  a  condi- 
tion, when  really  infected,  to  transmit 
it  to  men.  In  this  case,  the  difficulty 
remains  of  understanding  the  details 
which  are  given  of  the  appearances 
which  the  walls  presented.  There  is 
also  not  a  word  said  which  can  be  con- 
strued to  intimate  that  the  house-leprosy 
was  infectious  to  man  ;  on  the  contrary, 
tl>e  direction  to  remove  the  furniture 
before  the  priest  entered  to  inspect  the 
house,  lest  it  should  partake  in  the  sen- 
tence of  uncleanness  which  he  might 
see  occasion  to  pronounce,  is  the  very 
way  best  calculated  to  have  propagated 
the  leprous  contagion,  if  any  capable 
of  being  communicated  to  man  had  ex- 
isted. Michaelis  gives  an  explanation 
which  seems  more  clearly  to  elucidate 
the  subject  llian  any  oilier  which  has 
fallen  under  our  notice,  and  the  rejec- 
tion of  which  seems  to  leave  no  other 
alternative  than  the  accejitance  of  the 
rabbinical  interpretation  which  we  have 
mentioned.  He  observes  that  walls  and 
houses  are  often  attacked   with  some- 


thing  that  corrodes  and  consumes  them, 
and  which  is  called  by  the  Germans 
'  saltpetre,'  but  which  we  will  call 
'  mural  salt.'  This  njural  incrustation, 
or  efllorescence,  chiefly  appears  in  damp 
situations,  in  cellars  and  ground-floors, 
seldom  extending  to  the  upj)er  stories 
of  a  house  ;  and  its  efiects  are  in  many 
respects  so  injurious  as  to  justify,  and 
indeed  to  require,  in  some  climates,  the 
attention  of  a  legislator.  The  appear- 
ances wiiich  such  walls  exhibit  corres- 
pond very  well  with  the  descrijjtion 
given  in  this  chapter:  the  spots,  in- 
deed, are  not  often  of  a  greenish  or  red- 
dish hue,  though  they  are  sometimes 
met  with  of  the  latter  color.  The 
analogy  is  indeed  in  general  so  clear, 
that  Michaelis  says  he  had  known  more 
than  one  example  of  children  who, 
shortly  after  reading  the  account  here 
given  of  the  house-leprosy,  have  come 
with  terror  to  relate  that  they  had  dis- 
covered it  on  the  walls  of  the  cellar. 
They  '  described  it  distinctly  or  figura- 
ti  vely  to  their  parents,  and  were  laughed 
at  for  their  pains.  Laughed  at  they 
certainly  ought  not  to  have  been,  but  in- 
structed. Their  acute  vision  had  shown 
them  what  many  a  learned  man  has  in 
vain  sought  to  find  out.'  The  detri- 
mental  effects  of  this  efflorescence  are 
fully  detailed  by  the  same  author  ('Com- 
mentaries,' vol.  iii.  pp.  29S-305).  The 
following  is  the  substance  of  his  state- 
ment. The  walls  become  mouldy,  and 
that  to  such  a  degree,  as,  in  consequence 
of  the  corrosion  spreading  farther  and 
firther,  at  last  to  occasion  their  tum- 
bling down.  The  plaster  also  requires 
frequent  repairing,  as  it  blisters,  as  it 
is  called,  that  is,  detaches  itself  from 
tlie  wall,  swells,  and  then  falls  off*. 
The  things  that  lie  near  the  walls  thus 
affected  become  damaged,  and  in  the 
end  spoiled.  Books  and  other  articles 
that  fannot  bear  dampness  and  acids 
are  often  ruined  from  this  cause.  If 
this  'saltpetre'  be  strong  in  the  occu- 
pied apartments,  it  is  very  injurious  to 
health,  particularly  where  people  sleep 


132 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


35  And  he  that  owneth  the  house 
shall  come  and  tell  the  priest,  say- 
ing, It  seemelh  to  me  there  is  as  it 
were  '^  a  plague  in  the  house : 

36  Then  the  priest  shall  command 
that  they  empty  the  house  before 
the  priest  go  inlo  it  to  see  the 
plague,  that  all  that  is  in  the  house 
be  not  made  unclean  ;  and  afier- 

<1  Ps.  91.  10.    Prov.  3.  33.     Zech.  5.  4. 

near  ihe  wall.  If  such  effects  be  expe- 
rienced in  modern  Europe,  there  is 
room  to  conclude  that  they  were  more 
strongly  exhibited  at  the  early  period 
under  notice,  and  in  countries  where 
domestic  architecture  never  attained 
much  perfection,  and  where  people  gen- 
erally live  in  houses  having  but  one 
story.  Taking  this  to  be  the  '  house- 
leprosy  '  of  the  Scriptures,  the  object 
of  the  Mosaic  ordinance  is  sufficiently 
intelligible.'— P?cf.  Bib. 

35.  He  that  oicneth  the  house  shall 
come  and  tell  the  priest,  saying,  It 
seemelh  to  me  there  is  as  it  were  a  plague 
in  the  house.  Tliat  is,  the  plague  of 
leprosy.  The  owner,  it  seems,  was  to 
speak  in  a  qualified  and  dubious  man- 
ner, it  being  the  office  of  the  priest  to 
pronounce  a  positive  sentence  on  the 
subject.  '  Although  he  be  a  wise  man,' 
says  Maimonides,  '  and  knoweih  cer- 
tainly that  it  is  the  plague,  he  may  not 
determine  and  say,  The  plague  appear- 
eth  to  me  in  the  house  ;  but  he  shall 
say,  It  seemeth  to  me  there  is  as  it 
were  the  plague,'  &c.  The  serious  ul- 
timate loss  he  might  sustain  rendered 
it  the  interest  of  the  owner  to  give  the 
earliest  intimation  on  the  subject,  and 
to  be  attentive  to  the  first  indications 
of  infection.  If  it  gained  ground,  he 
not  only  lost  his  house,  but  probably 
his  furniture,  wiiich  we  have  no  reason 
to  conclude  to  have  been  removed  pre- 
vious to  inspection,  unless  when  early 
information  came  Irom  ihe  owner  him- 
self;  and  if  the  priest,  on  inspection, 
declared  the  house  unclean,  it  is  obvious 


ward  the  priest  shall  go  in  to  see 
the  house: 

37  And  he  shall  look  on  the 
plague,  and  behold,  if  the  plague 
be  in  the  walls  of  the  house,  with 
hollow  streaks,  greenish,  or  red- 
dish, which  in  sight  are  lower  than 
the  wall ; 

3S  Then  the  priest  shall  go  out 
of  the  house  to  the  door  of  the 


that  everything  which  remained  in  it 
became  unclean  also. 

26.  And  the  priest  shall  command  that 
they  empty  the  house.  Heb.  IjBI 
u-pinnu,  and  they  shall  prepare  ;  i.  e. 
by  removing  all  articles  of  furniture, 
and  every  thing  that  would  prevent  or 
impede  the  due  examination  of  the 
premises. 

37.  JVith  hollow  streaks.  This  was  in 
effect  the  same  kind  of  criterion  ihal 
was  established  for  detecting  the  leprosy 
in  the  human  body.  If  a  spot  was  deeper 
than  the  skin  of  the  flesh  it  was  decid- 
edly a  bad  symptom  ;  so  when  these 
hollow  streaks  or  rather  depressed  cavi- 
ties appeared  in  the  wall  of  a  house, 
showing  that  corrosion  had  already 
taken  place,  it  was  a  clear  sign  that  it 
was  a  house-lepros)'.  The  original  word 
Till^S/p';!)  shekaaruroth, is  a  compound 
word  with  the  import  of  sunk  or  loiv- 
lying,  and  here  doubtless  implies  an 
effect  on  the  stones  which  we  should 
describe  by  the  word  pitted.  The  Gr. 
has  /c</iA(icc5,  little  hollows,  and  the  Vulg. 
'  valliculas,'  little  vallies.  But  the  idea 
of  long  streaks  or  creases,  conveyed  by 
our  translation,  does  not  seem  to  be 
warranted  by  the  original,  nor  does 
there  appear  to  be  any  evidence  that 
this  kind  of  caries  or  gangrene  in  stones 
corroded  them  in  streaks.  It  was  ra- 
ther,  we    may   suppose,   in  spots. 

IT  Which  in  sight  are  lower  than  the 
wall.  That  is,  which  are  deeper  than 
the  surface  of  the  wall. 

38.  Then  the  priest  shall  go  out  of 
the  house,  &c.    The  particularity  with 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


133 


house,  and  shut  up  the  house  seven 
days: 

39  And  the  priest  shall  come  again 
ilie  seventh  day,  and  shall  look; 
and  behold,  if  the  plague  be  spread 
in  ihe  walls  of  the  house; 

40  Then  the  priest  shall  command 
that  they  take  away  the  stones  in 
v/hich  the  plague  Z5,  and  they  shall 
cast  them  into  an  unclean  place 
witliout  the  city  : 

41  And  he  shall  cause  the  house 
to  be  scraped  within  round  about, 
and  they  shall  pour  out  the  dust 
that  they  scrape  off'  without  the 
city  into  an  unclean  place  : 

42  And  they  shall  take  other 
stones,  and  put  ihem  in  the  place 
of  those  stones  ;  and  he  shall  take 
other  mortar,  and  shall  plaster  the 
house. 

which  these  circumstances  are  men- 
tioned, doubtless  implies  that  there 
was  someling  very  formal  in  the  manner 
of  his  pausing  at  the  door,  and  ordering 
it  to  be  efTectually  closed,  that  after  the 
j)rescribed  interval  he  might  return  and 
pronounce  a  more  definite  judgment. 
The  plague  would  sooner  appear  in  a 
vacant  than  in  an  occupied  house. 

40,  41.  That  they  take  away  the  stones 
171  which  the  plague  is.  That  is,  as  far 
lis  ihe  leprous  infection  had  extended  in 
the  walls.  It  is  remarkable  that  the 
vt-ry  same  steps  are  requisite-  when  a 
house  in  modern  times  is  infected  with 
the  nitrous  incrustralion.  The  spot  or 
sU:ne  which  produces  it  must  be  abso- 
lutely removed  ;  and  the  scraping  and 
Irtsh  plastering  is  also  necessary. 
When  any  part  ofthe  walls  impregnated 
u  itii  this  substance  is  suffered  to  remain, 
it  always  effloresces  anew,  and  beomes 
as  bad  as  before.  In  large  European 
buildings  it  is  not  indeed  necessary  to 
replaster  the  whole  house,  and  the  dif- 
Terence  in  this  respect  may  be  accounted 
for  by  the  apparent  smallness  of  the 
Hebrew  houses. 

43-45.  If  the  plague  come  again,  &c. 
12 


43  And  if  the  plague  come  again, 
and  break  out  in  the  house,  after 
that    he    hath    taken    away    the 
stones,  and  after  he  hath  scraped 
the  house,  and  after  it  is  plastered  ; 
I    44  Then  the  priest  shall  come  and 
j  look ;  and  behold,  if  the  plague  be 
spread  in   the  house,  it  is  e  a  fret- 
ting leprosy  in  the  house:  it  ts  un- 
I  clean. 

j    45  And  he  shall  break  down  the 

j  house,   the  stones  of  it,  and   the 

!  timber  thereof,  and  all  the  mortar 

of  the  house:  and  he  shall  carry 

them  forth  out  of  the  city  into  an 

unclean  place. 

46  Moreover,  he  that  goeth  into 

the  house  all   the  while  that  it  is 

shut  up,  shall  be  unclean  until  the 

even. 

e  ch.  13.  51.     Zech.  5.  4. 


It  was  possible  that  notvi'iihstanding  all 
the  precautions  thus  ordered  to  be 
taken,  their  efforts  might  still  be  una- 
vailing, and  the  taint  of  leprosy  disclose 
itself  in  the  walls  ofthe  house.  Where 
this  was  the  case,  the  only  remaining 
alternative  was  utterly  to  demolish  the 
building,  and  cast  away  the  materials 
as  abhorred  and  polluted  rubbisli,  into 
some  place  equally  unclean  and  abom- 
inable. A  leprous  house  was  not  to  be 
permitted  to  stand.  The  injury  which 
such  houses  might  do  to  the  health  of 
the  inhabitants,  or  to  the  articles  they 
contained,  was  of  more  consequence  in 
the  estimation  of  Moses  than  the  build- 
ings themselves.  Those  to  whom  this 
appears  strange,  and  who  lament  the 
fate  of  a  house  pulled  down  by  legal 
authority,  probably  ihink  of  large  and 
magnificent  houses  like  ours,  of  many- 
stories  high,  which  cost  a  great  deal  of 
money,  and  in  ihe  second  slory  of  which 
the  people  are  generally  secure  from  all 
danger  ofthe  sahpetre;  but  the  houses 
of  those  days  were  low,  and  of  very 
little  value. 

46,  47.  He  that  gocth  into  the  house, 
&c.     The  bare  entering  within  the  door 


134 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


47  And  he  that  lieth  in  the  house 
shall  wash  his  clothes:  and  he 
that  eateih  in  the  house  shall  wash 
his  cloihes. 

48  And  if  the  priest  shall  come 
in,  and  look  upon  it,  and  behold, 
the  plague  haih  not  spread  in  the 
house,  after  the  house  was  plas- 
tered :  then  the  priest  shall  pro- 
nounce the  house  clean,  because 
the  plague  is  healed. 

49  And  f  he  shall  take  to  cleanse 
the  house  two  birds,  and  cedar- 
wood,  and  scarlet,  and  hyssop  : 

50  And  he  shall  kill  the  one  of 
the  birds  in  an  earthen  vessel,  over 
running  water : 

f  ver.  4. 

of  a  suspected  house,  without  making 
any  slay  there,  incurred  defilement,  and 
imposed  separation  during  the  rest  of 
the  day.  But  one  that  ventured  to 
lodge  or  eat  in  the  house  under  these 
circumstances,  as  he  was  in  more  dan- 
ger ol  bringing  away  the  infection,  was 
required  to  wash  his  cloihes  before  he 
could  enjoy  his  usual  intercourse  with 
the  people.  This  was  an  ordinance 
well  calculated  to  convey  a  moral  ad- 
monition in  respect  to  the  duty  of 
avoiding  all  suspected  persons  and 
places,  or  as  the  apostle  terms  it,  of 
'  abstaining  from  the  least  appearance 
of  evil.' 

48-53.  The  priest  shall  pronounce 
the  house  clean.  Heb.  nn'J  tihar,  shall 
make  clean.  Gr.  KaOapiei,  shall  purify. 
That  is,  shall  do  this  declaratively,  as 
explained  above,  ch.  13.  3.  The  verdict 
thus  pronounced  was  to  be  accompanied 
wiili  the  same  offerings  and  riles  of 
purification  as  in  the  case  of  leprous 
persons  pronounced  clean.  '  The  se- 
rious investigation  which  the  matter 
had  undergone,  and  this  final  and  sol- 
emn declaralion,  that  the  house  was 
clean,  together  with  the  offering  made 
on  the  occasion,  was  well  calculated  to 
make  the  fact  known,  and  to  relieve  the 
public   mind   from  any  anxiety  which 


51  And  he  shall  take  the  cedar- 
wood,  and  the  hyssop,  and  the 
scarlet,  and  the  living  bird,  and  dip 
them  in  the  blood  of  the  slain  bird, 
and  in  the  running  water,  and 
sprinkle  the  house  seven  limes: 

52  And  he  shall  cleanse  the  house 
with  the  blood  of  the  bird,  and  with 

1  the  running  water,  and   with  the 
I  living  bird,  and   with   the  cedar- 
j  wood,  and  with  the  hyssop,  and 
with  the  scarlet: 

53  But  he  shall  let  go  the  living 
bird  out  of  the  city  into  the  open 
fields,  and  g  make  an  atonement 
for  the  house :  and  it  shall  be 
clean. 


e  ver.  20. 


might  be  entertained  concerning  the 
spread  of  the  house-leprosy,  and  at  the 
same  time  to  exonerate  the  proprietor 
from  any  inconvenience  to  which  he 
might  have  been  exposed  from  the  un- 
ascertained suspicion  that  the  infection 
was  in  his  house.  Michaelis  extols  the 
whole  ol  this  law  concerning  *  house- 
leprosy '  exceedingly,  under  the  view 
which  he  was  led  to  take  of  it,  and  in 
which  we  have  chiefly  followed  him  ; 
and  although  it  is  probably  attended 
wiih  less  evil  in  Europe,  than  in  the 
East,  he  inclines  to  wish  that  some 
similar  regulations  operated  in  newly, 
built  cities.  It  is,  however,  a  remark- 
able  fact  that,  so  far  from  this  being  the 
case,  the  sovereigns  of  Gern)any.  and 
probably  also  in  other  countries,  did  all 
in  their  power  to  encourage  the  mural 
incrustation  when  saltpetre  became 
necessary  in  the  manufacture  of  gun- 
powder. They  established  their  right 
to  the  product  of  the  incrustation,  even 
in  private  houses,  as  a  sovereign  regale  ; 
and  the  collectors  took  care,  in  scraping 
itoffj)eriodically,  to  leave  the  roots  (if 
we  may  so  express  it),  to  form  the 
source  of  a  future  crop;  and  the  inhab- 
itants dared  not  extirpate  it  altogether. 
The  collection  came,  in  the  end,  to  be 
farmed  out   by  the  sovereign  ;  and  the 


B.  C.  1490.] 


54  Tliis  25  the  law  for  all  manner 
of  plague  of  leprosy,  and  h  scall, 

55  And  for  the  i  leprosy  of  a  gar- 
ment, kand  of  an  house, 

h  ch.  13.  30.     '  ch.  13.  47.     k  yen  34. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

56  And  ifor  a  risin 


135 


saltpetre  regale  allogeiher  formed  a 
most  odious  oppression,  more  biilerly 
coniiilained  of  by  the  people  than  al- 
most :iny  other.  On  this  point  see 
BfcUmanii's  *  Hist,  of  Inventions,'  vol. 
ii.  pp.  476—478;  and  Michaelis,  vol. 
iii.  p.  304.'— P/cf.  Bib. 

57.  To  teach  when  it  is  unclean  and 
when  it  is  clean.  That  is,  to  teach 
the  priest  when  to  pronounce  a  person 
or  house  clean  or  unclean.    Heb.  mir^ 

''\n':Dn  siini  i<72t3n  ti^n  ichoroth  be. 

yom  hattamt  u-beyom  hattahor,  to  teach 
in  the  day  of  the  unclean  and  in  the  day 
of  the  clean,  *  Day  '  appears  here  to  be 
used  of  the  f/(?7?g^,9  or  transactions  that 
should  occur  in  it.  '  To  teach  in  the 
day  '  of  any  thing,  is  to  teach  respect- 
ing the  works  or  duties  appropriated  to 
that  day  or  season.  Il  is  a  Heb.  idiom 
of  which  the  full  force  cannot  be  very 
well  expressed  in  any  other  language. 

Remarks.— (2,  3.)  '  He  shall  be 
brouglu  unto  the  priest  ;  and  the  priest 
shall  go  forth  out  of  the  camp,'  &c. 
The  ministers  of  righteousness  are  to  be 
always  ready  to  meet  the  returning  pen- 
itent, who  would  fain  be  cleansed  I'rom 
the  defilement  of  sin,  or  who  hopes  he 
has  been,  and  welcome  him  back  to  the 
fold  of  Christ. 

(4.)  '  Then  shall  the  priest  command 
to  take  for  him,'  &c.  A  very  remark- 
able diiference  marks  the  vast  superi- 
ority of  our  great  High  Priest  over  the 
high  priest  of  the  Jews.  Tlie  latter, 
being  a  mere  man,  and  himself  com- 
passed with  infirmity,  could  not  heal 
the  leper;  lie  could  only  discover  by 
inspection  when  lie  was  already  healed 
by  God,  and  then  by  his  office  declare 
this  to  the  people.  He  was  then  to 
perform  the  ceremonies  appointed  for 


g,  and  for  a 
scab,  and  for  a  bright  spot  : 

57  To  m  teach  when  it  is  unclean, 
and  when  it  is  clean :  this  is  the 
law  of  leprosy. 

1  ch.  13.  2.    mDeut.  24.  8.  Ezek.  44.  23. 


his    cleansing,    and   tlius    restore   him 
again  to  society  and  to  the  privileges  of 
God's  house.     But  the  Lord  Jesus  heals 
the   leper.     '  Lord,  if  thou  wilt    thou 
canst  make  me  clean ;    and  Jesus  put 
I  forth  liis  hand,  and   touched  him,  and 
said,  I  will,  be  thou  clean  ;  and  inime- 
;  dialely  his  leprosy  departed  from  him 
■  and  he  was  cleansed.'     To  this  great 
I  Physician,  then,  let  us  resort,  to  obtain 
j  that  moral  cleansing  for  wliich  there  is 
tieither   cure   nor    relief  in   any  other 
'  quarter.    Let  us  cry  to  him  as  did  the 
leper,  in  the  day  of  his  flesh, 'Jesus, 
:  master,  have  mercy  on  us !'  and  God 
himself    shall   acknowledge  and    pro- 
I  nounce  us  clean.     The  hyssop  is  even 
I  now  ready  wherewith  to  sprinkle  our 
souls.     Let  us  use  it  by  faith,  and  we 
shall  experience  with  David  its  unfail- 
ing  efficacy  ;  '  Purge  me  with  hyssop, 
and  I  shall  be  clean  ;  wash  me,  and  I 
shall  be  whiter  than  snow.'     But  let  us 
be  sprinkled  not  once  or  twice  only,  but 
j '  seven  times,'  then  shall  we  be  '  washed 
1  thoroughly  from  our  iniquity,  and  be 
I  cleansed  from  our  sin.' 
I      (9.)  The  leper  did  not  come  at  once 
into  the  camp,  afler'he  had  been  pro- 
nounced clean,  and  sprinkled  according 
,  to  the  ordinance.     He  was  not  admitted 
I  to  his  tent,  or  restored  to  society,  till 
j  after   living    in   some   place   alone  for 
;  seven  days  more  ;  and  then  after  again 
;  washing  his  body  and  his  clothes,  and 
'  shaving  oiFall  his  hair,  even  to  his  eye- 
brows, he  was  reinstated  in  all  his  for- 
l  mcr  privileges  and  comforts.     This  was 
j  designed  to  remind  us,  liiat  the  infec- 
]  lion  of  nature,  the  defiling  effects  of  sin, 
still  remain,  even  in  those  who  are  re- 
I  generate,  and  force  upon  us  the  necessity 
'  of  a  daily  wasliing  in  Christ,  in  order  to 
I  our  perfect  cleansing.      It  is  only  in 


126 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1400. 


CHAPTER  XV. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses and  to  Aaron,  saying, 
2  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 

ach.  22.  4.  Numb.  5.  2.  2  Sam.  3.29 
Matt.  9.  20.     Mark  o.  25.     Luke  8.  43. 

heaven  that  we  can  be  pronounced  fully 
ilelivered  from  our  remaining  corrup- 
tions. But  there  is,  as  it  were,  the  short 
period  of  a  single  week  before  that 
event  arrives,  when  we  shall  be  intro- 
duced to  our  Father's  house,  to  our  eter- 
nal home.  The  intervening  time  must 
indeed  be  spent  in  humiliating  and 
painful  exercises,  but  those  exercises 
are  only  preparing'us  for  the  richer  en- 
joyment of  the  promised  bliss. 

(14.)  The  application  of  the  blood 
and  oil  to  the  ear,  the  thumb,  and  the 
toe  of  the  leper,  seems  to  intimate  that 
every  member  of  the  body,  and  every 
facult}'  of  the  soul,  needs  a  special  puri- 
fication from  guilt  and  corruption,  and 
a  special  consecration  in  the  renewed 
man  to  the  service  of  God.  The  lan- 
guage of  the  solemn  rite  was  virtually 
this  :  '  Now  you  are  made  clean,  let  all 
your  faculties  and  powers  be  devoted  to 
the  service  of  God.  Let  your  ears  be 
open  to  the  commands  of  God.  Let  the 
•work  of  your  hands  be  bestowed  upon 
the  business  of  your  high  calling,  and 
the  accomplishment  of  the  divine  will. 
Let  your  footsteps  be  ordered  in  his 
word.' 

(15.)  Neither  the  blood  nor  the  oil 
were  on  any  account  to  be  omitted  in 
the  purification  of  the  leper  ;  nor  can 
either  of  ihem  be  omitted  in  the  restora- 
tion of  our  souls  to  God.  The  oil  sig- 
nificantly shadowed  forth  the  Holy 
Ghost  as  a  spirit  of  sanclificaiion.  By 
the  blood  we  are  justified,  and  by  the 
oil  we  are  sanctified.  And  it  is  v.orthy 
of  remark,  that  the  order  to  the  leper 
was,  lliat  the  oil  should  be  put  vpo7i 
the  blood  of  the  trespass-offering,  hint- 
ing that  the  blood  of  Christ  must  first 
be  applied  for  our  justification,  and  that 
then  the  Spirit  will  be    given  for  our 


rael,  and  say  unto  them,  a  When 
any  man  hath  a  running  issue  out 
of  his  flesh,  because  of  his  issue  he 
is  unclean. 

3  And  this  shall  be  h.is  unclean- 
ness,  in    his   issue :    whether   his 


sanctification.  This  is  the  more  care- 
fully  to  be  observed,  inasmuch  as  men 
are  very  prone  to  reverse  this  estab- 
lished order.  We  seek  sanctification 
first,  and  then  make  our  attainments  a 
ground  of  justification.  But  our  plea 
on  this  score  will  be  rejected.  We  are 
'  justified /ree/j/  through  grace.' 


CHAPTER  XV. 

Of  various  Personal  Uncleannesses  and 

Purifications. 

2.  When  any  man  hath  a  running 
out  of  his  flesh.  Heb.  nt  n%Ti  "^5 
1"l'iDn^  ki  yihye'h  zab  mibbesaro,  when 
he  shall  be  flowing  from  his  flesh.  Gr. 
cj  ^Mv  ycvrj-at  pvtng  tK  tov  acj[xaros  avrov^ 
to  whomsoever  there  shall  be  an  issue  or 
flux  from  his  body.  The  term  '  flesh ' 
is  undoubtedly  here  an  euphemism,  it 
being  used  in  the  same  sense  in  which 
it  occurs  Gen.  17.  13,  Ezek.  16.  26.  As 
to  the  disease  itself  which  is  here  men- 
tioned, though  usually  expressed  by  the 
Gr.  term  yoi'oppciaj  gonorrhea,  which 
has  become  familiar  in  English  nosolo- 
gy, yei  it  is  not  certain  that  it  was  in- 
tended to  designate  the  bad  infection 
known  by  it  in  modern  times.  If  it 
were,  the  disease  probably  existed  in  a 
much  milder  form  than  the  virulent 
complaint  so  denominated  among  us, 
and  which  a  retributive  providence  has 
made  in  general  the  inseparable  conse- 
quent of  guilty  indulgence.  But  it  is 
for  the  most  part  understood  by  the 
Jews  of  the  natural  seed-flux,  v.  hich 
arises  from  debility  of  the  spermatic 
organs. 

3.  This  shall  be  his  uncleanness  in 
his  issue.  That  is,  in  these  things, 
which  he  goes  on  to  specify,  shall  cun« 

i  sist  the  uncleanness  of  the  man  who  is 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XV. 


137 


flesh  run  with  his  issue,  or  his  flesh 
be  stopped  from  his  issue,  it  is  his 
uncleanness. 

4  Every  bed  whereon  helieth  that 
haih  the  issue,  is  unclean:  and 
every  thing  whereon  he  sitteth, 
shall  be  unclean. 

5  And  whosoever  toucheth  his 
bed,  shall  wash  his  clothes,  b  and 
bathe  himself  in  water,  and  be  un- 
clean until  the  even. 

6  And  he  that  sitteth  on  any  thing 
whereon  he  sat  that  hath  the  issue, 
shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe 
himself  in  water,  and  be  unclean 
until  the  even. 

7  And  he  that  toucheth  the  flesh 
of  him  that  hath  the  issue,  shall 
wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe  him- 
self m  water,  and  be  unclean  until 
the  even. 

8  And  if  he  that  hath  the  issue 
spit  upon  him  that  is  clean ;  then 

b  ch.  11.  25,  and  17.  15. 


affected   by    gonorrhoea. IT  Or    his 

flesh  be  stopped  from  his  issue.  That 
is,  clogged,  obstructed,  so  as  to  prevent, 
by  its  tliiclcening,  a  free  and  easy  emis- 
sion. In  either  of  the  cases  mentioned 
the  man  was  made  unclean,  and  com- 
municated his  defilement  to  the  beds, 
benches,  &c.,  with  which  he  came  in 
contact,  and  through  them  to  any  one 
who  might  chance  to  sit  or  lie  upon  them, 
so  lliat  he  was  required  to  bathe  him- 
self in  water  and  wash  his  clothes,  and 
be  considered  unclean  till  evening. 

12.  The  vessel  of  earth — shall  be  bro- 
ken ;  and  every  vessel  of  wood  shall  be 
rinsed  in  water.  A  similar  command 
as  to  earthen  vessels,  is  given  ch.  6.  38, 
where  it  is  also  directed  that  vessels  of 
brass  sliould  be  scoured.  ]Michaelis 
asks  why  earthen  vessels  could  not  be 
as  well  cleansed  by  washing  as  those 
of  wood  or  copper.  In  reply  to  this, 
Mr.  Kiito  says :— '  Without  entering  into 
the  question  as  to  the  art  of  glazing 
earthenware,  it  is  our  strong  impression 
that  the  earthen  vessels  which  Moses 
12* 


he  shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe 
himself  in  water,  and  be  unclean 
until  the  even. 

9  And  what  saddle  soever  he  rid- 
eth  upon  that  hath  the  issue,  shall 
be  unclean. 

10  And  whosoever  toucheth  any 
thing  that  was  under  him,  shall  be 
unclean  until  the  even  :  and  he  that 
beareth  any  of  those  things,  shall 
wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe  him- 
self ia  water,  and  be  unclean  until 
the  even. 

11  And  whomsoever  he  toucheth 
that  hath  the  issue  (and  hath  not 
rinsed  his  hands  in  water)  he  shall 
wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe  himself 
in  water,  and  be  unclean  until  the 
even. 

12  And  the  c  vessel  of  earth  that 
he  toucheth  which  hath  the  issue, 
shall  be  broken :  and  every  vessel 
of  wood  shall  be  rinsed  in  water. 

c  ch.G.  23,  and  11.  32,  33. 

directed  to  be  broken  were  not  glazed. 
It  is  evident  that  glazed  vessels  may  be 
as  well  or  better  cleansed  from  every 
impurity,  by  washing,  than  hard  wood, 
or  even  copper  ;  whereas  unglazed  ves- 
sels, from  their  porous  nature,  would 
receive  a  more  permanent  taint  from 
any  accidental  defilement  than  either. 
Indeed,  we  would  venture  to  be  more 
definite,  and  point  to  a  sort  of  pottery, 
which  escaped  the  notice  of  i^.Iichaelis, 
as  ir.ost  probably  that  to  which  the 
I  direction  may  be  understood  with  pecu- 
{  liar  propriety  to  apply.  In  Egypt  and 
Western  Asia,  the  inhabitants  iiave,  in 
common  use,  vessels  of  porous  clay, 
hghtly  baked,  and  rather  thin  in  pro- 
portion  to  the  size  of  the  vessel.  They 
are  exclusively  used  for  the  purifying 
and  cooling  of  water.  The  water  con- 
stantly  oozes  through  the  minute  pores 
of  the  vessel,  forming  a  thick  dew  or 
moisture  on  the  outer  surface,  the  rapid 
evaporation  of  which  reduces  the  tem- 
perature of  the  vessel,  and  cf  the  water 
it  contains,  much  below  that  of  the  at- 


138 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


13  And  when  he  that  hath  an 
issue  is  cleansed  of  his  issue ;  then 
d  he  shall  number  to  himself  seven 
days  for  his  cleansing,  and  wash 
his  clothes,  and  bathe  his  flesh  in 
running  water,  and  shall  be  clean. 

14  And  on  the  eighth  day  he  shall 
take  to  him  «  two  turtle-doves,  or 
two  young  pigeons,  and  come  be- 
fore the  Lord,  unto  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation,  and 
give  them  unto  the  priest : 

d  ver.   23.     ch.  14.   8.     e  ch.    14.  22,  23 

mosphere  ;  by  which  means  the  iiihab- 
ilanls  are  enabled  to  obtain,  in  the 
warmest  weather,  water  perfectly  cool 
for  drink.  The  water,  as  it  passes 
through,  is  filtered  to  the  most  perfect 
clearness  ;  and,  for  family  use,  there 
are  large  vessels  of  this  sort,  propped 
upon  frames  of  wood,  with  olher  vessels 
of  similar  clay,  but  different  form, 
placed  underneath  to  receive  the  filtered 
water  that  drops  from  the  outer  surface 
of  the  other.  Thus -a  supply  of  water, 
perfectly  clear  and  refreshingly  cool, 
is  at  once  secured.  Jugs  of  various 
sizes,  and  elegant  but  fragile  driuking- 
cups,  of  the  same  clay,  are  also  em- 
ployed to  keep  the  filtered  water  cool 
while  at  hand  for  occasional  use,  and 
wiiile  being  actually  used.  Now  the 
manufacture  of  these  percolating  vessels 
originated  in  Egypt  in  very  ancient 
times,  and  they  are  still  made  there  in 
grenl  perfection.  If  the  invention  as- 
ctMids  to  the  time  of  Moses,  there  can 
be  no  question  that  the  Israelites  w-ere 
jirqnainted  with  the  art  of  making  them, 
•  id  would  questionless  use  them  for 
lii'-  purpose  of  purifying  and  refrigerat- 
ing ilie  generally  bad  water  of  the 
deserts  through  which  they  wandered  ; 
and  as  they  had  vessels  of  wood  and 
copjier  for  other  purposes,  it  is  not  too 
iriuch  lo  suppose  that  their  earthen  ves- 
sels were  almost  exclusively  of  tliis 
description  ;  for  to  this  day  a  wandering 
people  do  not  like  to  encutriber  them- 
selves witii  numerous  earthen  vessels, 


:  15  And  the  priest  shall  offer  them, 
j  f  the  one  for  a  sin-offering,  and  the 
other /or  a  burnt-offering;  gand 
the  priest  shall  make  an  atonement 
for  him  before  the  Lord  for  his 
issue. 

16  And  bif  any  man's  seed  of 
copulation  go  out  from  iiim,  then 
he  shall  wash  all  his  flesh  in  water, 
and  be  unclean  until  the  even. 

17  And  every  garment,  and  every 

f  ch.  14.  30,  31.  gch.  14.  19,  31.  h  ch.  22. 
4.    Deut.  23.  10. 


which  are  so  liable  to  be  broken  in  their 
removals.  Assuming,  then,  tliat  such 
were  their  vessels, — the  direction  lo 
break  them  when  defiled  is  easy  lo  be 
understood,  because,  from  their  remark 
ably  porous  nature,  whatever  spot,  slain, 
or  other  impurity  they  receive,  is  at 
once  absorbed  into  their  mass,  either 
immediately  or  through  the  agency  of 
the  water,  and  it  becomes  impossible  to 
cleanse  them  entirely  by  any  common 
process.  In  fact,  we  have  with  our  own 
hands  broken  many  jugs  and  drinking- 
cups  of  this  description,  when  they  re- 
ceived some  accidental  contaminrtion, 
from  the  spontaneous  feeling  that  they 
had  become  wholly  defiled,  and  could 
not  be  cleansed.  It  seems  to  us  that 
the  explanation  we  have  here  given  will 
account  more  satisfactorily  than  any 
other  for  the  distinction  wliich  has  oc- 
casioned so  much  perplexity  to  Mi- 
chaelis  and  other  commentators.  Simi- 
lar usages  to  those  which  the  text 
inculcates,  as  to  the  ireatmenl  of  defiled 
vessels,  prevailed  among  the  ancient 
Egyptians,  and  still  do  so  among  the 
Mohammedans  and  Hindoos.' — P.  Bib. 
13.  Then  sfiall  he  number  to  himself 
seven  days,  &c.  During  tliis  lime  he 
was  to  keep  himself  secluded  by  way* 
of  testing  the  completeness  of  his  cure  ; 
and  if  the  issue  ceased  entirely  for  that 
whole  week,  he  was  then  to  consider 
himself  so  far  clean  as  to  be  entitled  to 
ofTcr  tlie  following  sacrifices  as  an  atone- 
ment for  having  been  legally  unclean. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XV. 


139 


skin  whereon  is  the  seed  of  copu- 
lation, shall  be  washed  with  wa- 
ter, and  be  unclean  until  the  even. 

18  The  woman  also  with  whom 
rnan  shall  lie  with  seed  of  copula- 
tion, they  shall  both  bathe  them- 
selces  in  water,  and  i  be  unclean 
until  the  even. 

19  ^  And  k  if  a  woman  have  an 
issue,  and  iier  issue  in  her  flesh  be 
blood,  she  shall  be  put  apart  seven 
days:  and  whosoever  toucheth  her 
shall  be  unclean  until  the  even. 

20  And  every  thing  that  she  lieth 
upon  in  her  separation  shall  be  un- 
clean; every  thing  also  that  she 
sitteth  upon  shall  be  unclean. 

21  And  whosoever  toucheth  her 
bed  shall  wash  his  clothes,  and 
bathe  himself  in  water,  and  be  un- 
clean until  the  even. 

22  And  whosoever  toucheth  any 
thing  that  she  sat  upon  shall  wash 
his  clothes,  and  bathe  himself  in 
water,  and  be  unclean  until*  the 
even. 

23  And  if  it  be  on  her  bed,  or  on 
any  thing  whereon  she  sitteth, 
when  he  toucheth  it  he  shall  be 
unclean  until  the  even. 

24  And  1  if  any  man  lie  with  her 
at  all,  and  her  flowers  be  upon  him, 
he  shall  be  unclean  seven  days: 
and  all  the  bed  whereon  he  lieth 
shall  be  unclean. 

25  And  if  ma  woman  have  an 

il  Sam.  21.4.    k  ch.  12,  2.    1  See  ch.  20.  18. 


IS.  The  woman  also  with  whom  man 
shall  lie,  &c.  The  sense  of  this  verse  is 
somewliat  doubtful,  but,  as  it  should 
seem,  it  refers  to  the  preceding  verses, 
viz.  ilie  wife,  also,  in  case  that  should 
happen  which  is  mentioned  v.  ]6,  17, 
shall  bathe  and  be  unclean  till  evening. 

24.  And  if  any  man  lie  with  her,  &c. 
That  is,  without  knowing  her  to  be  in 
that  comlition  ;  for  if  it  was  done  know- 
ingly, both  were  liable  to  the  punish- 
ment of  death.  Lev.  20.  8.  Comp. 
J-'^v.  18.  19.    See  also  Ezek.  22.  10. 


issue  of  her  blood  many  days  out 
of  the  time  of  her  separation,  or  if 
it  run  beyond  the  time  of  her  sepa- 
ration ;  all  the  days  of  the  issue 
of  her  uncleanness  shall  be  as  the 
days  of  her  separation ;  she  shall 
be  unclean. 

26  Every  bed  whereon  she  lieth 
all  the  days  of  her  issue  shall  be 
unto  her  as  the  bed  of  her  separa- 
tion :  and  whatsoever  she  sitteth 
upon  shall  be  unclean,  as  the  un- 
cleanness of  her  separation. 

27  And  whosoever  toucheth  those 
things  shall  be  unclean,  and  shall 
wash  his  clothes,  and  bathe  him- 
self in  water,  and  be  unclean  until 
the  even. 

^  2S  But  n  if  she  be  cleansed  of  her 
issue,  then  she  shall  number  to 
herself  seven  days,  and  after  that 
she  shall  be  clean. 

29  And  on  the  eighth  day  she 
shall  take  unto  her  two  turtles,  or 
two  young  pigeons,  and  bring  them 
unto  the  priest,  to  the  door^of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 

30  And  the  priest  shall  off'er  the 
one /or  a  sin-offering,  and  the  other 
for  a  burnt-offering;  and  the  priest 
shall  make  an  atonement  fur  her 
before  the  Lord  fur  the  issue  of 
her  uncleanness. 

31  Thus  shall  ye  o  separate  the 
children  of  Israel  from   their  un- 

m  Matt.  9.  'iO.  Mark  5.  25.  Luke  S.  43. 
nver.  13.  och.  11.  47.  Deut.  24.  3.  Ezek. 
44.  23. 


25.  And  if  a  woman  have  an  issue  of 
her  blood,  &c.  This  refers  not  to  any 
thing  natural  or  ordiimry,  but  to  a 
chronic,  morbid  issue,  constituting  the 
disease  of  which  mention  is  made  m  ilie 
gospel,  Mat,  9.  20,  where  a  woman 
'  which  was  diseased  with  an  issue  of 
blood  twelve  years,'  is  said  to  have 
come  behind  the  Savior  and  touched  the 
liem  of  his  garment,  and  was  made 
whole. 

31.  Thus  shall  ye  separate  the  child- 
ren of  Israel  from  their  uncleanness. 


140 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


cleanness:  that  they  die  not  in 
their  uncleanness,  when  they  p  de- 
file my  labernacle  that  is  among 
them. 

32  q  This  is  the  law  of  him  that 
hath  an  issue,  rand  nf  him  whose 


P  Numb.  5.  3,  and  19.  13,  20.     Ezek.  5.  11, 
and  23.  33.     1  ver.  2.     r  ver.  IG. 


Heb.  Dn*Trn  hizzartem,  from  the  root 
^^2  ndzar,  to  separate,  from  which 
comes  '  Nazarite,'  applied  to  one  who 
was  peculiarly  separated  and  sajxctificd 
to  the  Lord.  The  use  of  the  term 
plainly  implies  that  the  people  of  Is- 
rael, by  their  abstinence  from  every 
thing  forbidden,  and  by  their  rigid  ob- 
servance of  all  these  ordinances,  were 
to  demean  themselves  before  God  as  a 
nation  of  Nazarites.  The  Gr.  has 
£vAu,'3£<j  TrnrjfTeTe,  ye  shall  make  devoutly 
u-ary. IT  When  they  defile  my  taber- 
nacle that  is  ajnong  the.n.  Heb.  t!X?2uH 
betammeum,  in  their  defiling.  It  is 
clear  from  this,  that  one  special  design 
of  these  enacunenls  was  to  secure  a 
becoming  degree  of  reverence  for  the 
Tabernacle.  This  was  the  seat  and 
throne  of  the  divine  glory,  and  nothing 
was  to  be  allowed  within  its  precincts 
which  would  go  to  lower  the  general 
estimate  of  the  purity  and  sanctity 
which  God  would  have  attached  to  the 
J. lace  of  his  peculiar  residence.  Comp. 
Jer.  2.  23,  and  7.  30;  Ezek.  5.  11.— 
14.  11,-22.3,4,-37.23. 

32.  This  is  the  law  of  him  that  hath 
an  issue.  '  We  may  conclude  our  re- 
marks upon  these  chapters  relating  to 
contagious  disorders,  and  acts  causing 
ceremonial  uncleanness,  by  directing 
attention  to  the  admirable  regulalinns 
for  preventing  contagion.  Tlie  subject 
is  now  almost  entirely  overlooked  in 
the  East,  excejit  so  far  as  regards  some 
regulations  concerning  lepers,  which 
appear  to  have  been  derived  from  thof.e 
now  before  us.  We  are  unacquainted 
with  any  Oriental  nations,  ancient  or 
modern,  which  had  a  sanatory  code  in 


seed  goeth  from  him,  and  is  defiled 
therewith  ; 
33  s  And  of  her  that  is  sick  of  her 
flowers,  and  of  him  that  haih  an 
issue,  of  the  man,  tand  of  the  wo- 
man, u  and  of  him  that  lieth  with 
her  that  is  unclean. 

s  ver.  19.    t  ver.  '25.    "  ver  24. 

the  slightest  degree  comparable  to  this, 
which  is  indeed  scarcely  equalled  by 
the  regulations  of  the  best  European 
lazarettos.  We  have  been  eye-wiine.sses 
of  the  fearful  consequences  which  pro- 
ceed in  Asiatic  countries  from  the  ab- 
sence of  any  measures  to  prevent  the 
spread  of  contagious  disorders.  In 
Mohammedan  Asia  this  may  be  partly 
owing  to  the  medical  doctrine  of  Mo- 
hammed, who,  in  liis  ignorant  .self- 
sufficiency,  undertook,  according  to  one 
of  the  received  traditions,  to  declare 
that  diseases  were  not  contagious. 
This  dictum  had  its  weight,  although  it 
was  contrary  to  the  received  opinions 
of  his  time,  for,  as  the  Arabian  com- 
mentator remartis,  *  It  was  a  belief  of 
the  people  of  ignorance,  that  any  one 
silling  near  a  diseased  person,  or  eating 
with  one,  would  take  his  disease.' 
{Mischat-ul-Masabih.  Calcutta,  1810.) 
It  is  true  that  he  seems  to  direct  the 
avoidance  of  intercourse  with  a  person 
laboring  under  the  ele))hantiasis — but 
this  is  a  solitary  exception  to  his  gen- 
eral rule.  Mohammed  has  adopted 
from  the  chapter  before  us,  and  other 
parts  of  the  Penlaieuch,  the  laws  re- 
lating to  ceremonial  uncleanness,  and 
has  added  many  others  of  his  own,  i3ut 
there  is  this  difference  in  the  result, 
that  uncleanness  under  his  law  does  not 
generally  extend  beyond  the  time  when 
the  unclean  persons  bathe  and  wash 
any  defiling  stain  from  their  clothes. 
There  are  some  exceptions,  diiefly  rela- 
tive to  females,  in  which  the  conse- 
quences of  defilement  more  nearly  coin- 
cide with  those  of  the  Leviiical  law.'— . 
Pid.  Bib. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


141 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

THE    DAY   OF  ATONEMENT. 

The  proper  place  of  lliis  chapter,  as 
a]ipears  from  v.  1,  would  have  been  ini- 
ir.cdiately  afler  the  tenth  ;  but  the  death 
of  Aaron's  two  sons,  fur  their  profane 
cdntluct  in  the  discharge  of  their  office 
as  priests,  gave  occasion  to  the  enact- 
ment of  the  above  cited  laws  respecting 
the  various  uncleannesses  which  dis- 
qualified an  Israelite  for  approaching 
the  sanctuary.  Those  ordinances  hav- 
ing been  dispatched  in  the  five  preceding 
chapters,  the  regular  thread  of  the 
sacred  record  is  now  resumed,  and 
Moses  goes  on  to  give  directions  con- 
cerning the  great  national  festival  of 
atonement  in  its  various  details. 

Tiiis  is  called  by  the  sacred  writer 
tj'^1"ir«ri  CT'  yom  hakkippurim,  day 
of  expiations  or  atonements,  and  by  the 
modern  Jews  ^15!]  kippur.  It  was  so 
called  from  its  having  been  instituted 
for  the  expiation  of  all  the  sins,  irrev- 
orences,  and  pollutions  of  all  the  Israel- 
ites,  from  tlie  highest  priest  to  the  low- 
est people,  committed  by  them  through- 
out the  year.  It  was  observed  on  the 
tenth  day  of  the  seventh  month,  or 
Tisri,  corresponding  to  a  part  of  our 
September.  It  was  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant and  interesting  days  in  the 
whole  Jewish  calendar  ;  and  though 
called  occasionally  the  '  feast  of  expia- 
tion,' yet  its  genuine  character  was 
rather  iliat  of  a  fast— a  day  for  <  afflict- 
ing their  souls,'— and  is  only  called 
•  feast '  in  the  sense  of  a  set  solemnity. 
It  is  the  day  alluded  to,  Acts  27.  9: 
'  Now  when  much  time  was  spent,  and 
when  sailing  was  now  dangerous,  be- 
cause the  fast  was  now  already  past, 
Paul  admonished  them,'  &c.  It  was  in 
all  its  services  and  ceremonies  the  full- 
est  representation,  the  most  perfect 
shadow,  of  the  great  work  of  redemp-  | 
lion  ;  the  high  priest  prefiguring,  in  all 
lie  did,  that  which  Christ,  in  the  fullness 
of  times,  was  ordained  to  do.  On  this 
account  a  somewhat  minute  notice  of 


the  observances  of  the  day  may  be  pro- 
per in  this  connexion. 

Of  so  much  sacredness  was  this  so- 
lemnity regarded,  that  the  people  began 
their  preparation  for  it  seven  days  be- 
fore, by  removing  the  high  priest  from 
his  own  house  to  a  chamber  in  the  tem- 
ple, (after  the  temple  was  built),  lest 
he  should  contract  such  a  pollulion  from 
any  of  his  family,  as  might  incur  a  seven 
days'  uncleanness,and  thereby  unfit  him 
for    performing   his    pontifical    duties. 
On  the  third  and  seventh  of  these  days, 
he  was  besprinkled  with  the  ashes  of 
the  red  heifer,  lest  he  might  inadvert- 
ently have  been  defiled  by  a  dead  body. 
On  the  morning  of  the  day  before  that 
of  the  atonement,  they  brought  him  to 
the  east  gate  of  the  court  of  the  Geo- 
tiles,  where   they  made  bullocks,  and 
rams,  and  lambs  to  pass  before   him, 
that  he  might  be  the  better  able  to  make 
the  proper  selection  ;  and  on  every  day 
of  the  seven  they  caused  him  to  sprinkle 
the  blood  of  the  daily  sacrifice,  to  burn 
the  parts  of  it  upon  the  altar,  to  offer 
the  incense,  and  to  trim  the  lamps,  that 
he  might  be   the  more  familiar  with 
these  offices,  when  called  to  perform 
them.     He  was  moreover  committed, 
for  a  part  of  each  of  the  days,  to  some 
of  the  elders  of  the   Sanhedrim,  who 
read  to  him  the  rites  of  the  day  in  order 
to  make  sure  of  his  going  rightly  through 
the  rubric.    He  was  then  conducted  into 
the  chamber  of  incense  that  he  might 
learn  to  handle  the  incense,  and  to  take 
an  oath  as  to  the  mode  of  burning  it 
when  he  entered  into  the  holiest  of  all. 
Their  words  on  the  occasion  were  as 
follows:  —  'High  priest,  we  are   the 
messengers  of  the  Sanhedrim,  and  thou 
art  our  messenger,  and  that  of  the  San- 
hedrim ;  we  adjure  thee  by  Him  that 
caused  his  name  to  dwell  in  this  house, 
that  thou  alter  not  any  thing  of  what 
we  have  spoken  unto  thee.'    The  reason 
of  this  solemn  adjuration  was,  that  a 
Sadducee,  in  contempt  of  tlie  written 
word,  and  of  their   traditions,  at   one 
time  had  dared  to  kindle  the  incense 


142 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


■without  the  vail,  and  to  carry  it  smok- 
ing within  ;  whereas  he  ought  not  to 
have  kindled  it  till  within  the  vail. 
During  the  night  that  preceded  the 
grand  soleinnity,  he  was  required  to  eat 
but  sparingly,  though  he  was  to  fust  the 
whole  of  the  next  day,  for  fear  that  he 
might  become  drowsy,  and  thus  dese- 
crate in  some  measure  the  services  of 
the  day.  Tliis  entire  night  was  spent 
in  his  expounding,  or  hearing  expounded 
to  him,  the  written  law. 

Tiie  day  having  at  length  arrived,  the 
high  priest  laid  aside  his  ordinary  dress, 
bathed  hiiriself  the  first  tiuie,  and  put 
on  the  rich  garments  peculiar  to  his 
oiFice.  Haijited  with  these,  he  instantly 
went  into  the  court  of  the  priests,  went 
to  the  laver  according  to  priestly  usage, 
to  wash  iiis  hands  and  iiis  feet  i'or  tlie 
first  time  ;  proceeded  thence  to  the 
north  side  of  the  altar,  to  kill  the  morn- 
ing sacrifice;  ascended  the  altar  with 
the  several  pieces,  and  laid  them  on  the 
fire  ;  went  into  the  holy  place  to  trim 
the  lamp  and  ofier  the  incense  ;  blessed 
tlie  people  on  the  top  of  the  steps  of 
the  porch  ;  and  in  short  did  all  that  be- 
longed to  the  ordinary  morning  service. 

Having  finished  this  part  of  his  duty, 
the  next  thing  was  to  solemnize  his 
own  mind  and  the  people's  by  some 
previous  sacrifices.  These,  in  Num. 
29.  8-11,  are  said  to  be  as  follows: — a 
bullock,  a  ram,  and  seven  Iambs  for  a 
burnt-offering,  with  their  appropriate 
meal-offerings  ;  and  a  kid  of  the  goats 
for  a  sin-offering.  When  he  had  finish- 
ed these,  he  washed  his  hands  and  feet 
a  second  time  at  the  laver.  He  then 
retired  to  a  particular  chamber  of  the 
temple,  and  proceeded  to  strip  himself 
of  his  rich  habiliments,  to  bathe  himself 
in  water  a  second  time,  and  to  put  on 
his  plain  white  linen  vestments,  the 
same  dress  as  that  worn  by  the  common 
priests,  except  that  he  had  the  sacer- 
dotal mitre  on  his  head.  Thus  attired, 
he  proceeded  to  the  work  of  sacrifice. 
Going  up  to  the  bullock,  and  standing 
with  his  face  towards  the  temple,  he 


laid  both  his  hands  on  the  head  of  the 
animal,  and  solemnly  pronounced  the 
following  words  :  '  0  Lord,  I  have  sin« 
nod,  done  perversely,  and  transgressed 
before  ihee,  I  and  my  house.  I  beseech 
thee,  0  Lord,  expiate  the  sins,  perver« 
sitics,  and  transgressions  whereby  I 
have  sinned,  done  perversely,  and  trans- 
gressed, I  and  my  house,  as  it  is  written 
in  the  law  of  Moses,  thy  servant,  say- 
j  ing,  For  in  this  day  he  will  expiate  for 
you,  to  purge  you  from  all  your  sins  be- 
fore the  Lord,  that  ye  may  be  clean  j' 
referring  to  v,  30,  where  these  words 
are  to  be  found. 

Having  made  this  confession,  he  went 
to  the  north-east  corner  of  the  court, 
where  the  two  kids  of  the  goats,  intend- 
ed for  the  congregation,  were  ordained 
to  stand.  There  he  cast  lots  for  the 
two  goats,  by  means  of  two  pieces  of 
gold,  put  into  a  box  called  "^S^p  kelphi, 
on  one  of  which  was  written  nirT^P 
laihovah,for  the  Lord, and  on  the  other 
bTHT^b  le-azazel,for  Azazel,  rendered 
in  our  version, '  for  the  scape-goat,'  i.i 
relation  to  which  an  extended  discus, 
sion  will  be  found  in  tlie  ensuing  notes 
He  then  proceeded  to  slay  the  bulloclc 
for  his  own  sins,  and  the  goat  upon 
which  the  lot  had  fallen  to  be  sacrificed 
to  the  Lord  ;  after  which  he  filled  a 
censer  with  burning  coals  from  the  altar, 
and  putting  two  handfu's  of  incense 
into  a  vase,  he  bore  them  into  the  holy 
of  holies.  Having  here  poured  the  in- 
cense  upon  the  coals,  he  returned,  took 
the  blood  of  the  bullock  and  the  goat, 
and  went  again  into  the  most  holy 
place.  With  his  finger  he.first  sprinkled 
the  blood  of  the  bullock,  and  afterwards 
of  the  goat,  upon  the  lid  of  llie  ark  of 
the  covenant,  and  seven  times  also  he 
sprinkled  it  upon  the  floor  before  the 
ark.  He  then  returned  from  the  most 
holy  into  the  holy  place,  and  besmeared 
the  horns  of  the  golden  altar  with  the 
blood  of  the  bullock  and  the  goat,  and 
jetted  the  blood  seven  times  over  the 
surface  of  the  altar. 

The  next  duty  of  the  high  priest  was 


B.  C.  1490.J 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


1^ 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses after  a  the  death  of  the 
two  sons  of  Aaron,  when  they  of- 
fered before  the  Lorp,  and  died  : 
2  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 

a  ch.  10. 1,  2. 

to  iriiike  an  atonement  for  the  holy 
place,  for  the  tabernacle,  and  for  the 
altar.  Tliis  was  done  by  sprinkling  the 
blood  of  the  bullock  and  the  blood  of 
the  goat,  each  right  before  the  vail, 
and  then  by  mingling  them  together 
and  sprinkling  the  horns  and  the  body 
of  the  golden  altar  oi  incense. 

We  are  now  come,  in  the  order  of  the 
ceremonies,  to  the  scape-goat,  which 
was  to  be  sent  away  into  the  wilder- 
ness. To  this  animal  as  he  stood  in 
the  court  of  tlie  priests,  the  high-priest 
approached,  and  laying  both  hands  upon 
its  head,  which  was  bound  around  with 
a  scarlet  thread,  made  over  it  a  solemn 
confession  of  the  sins  of  the  people  of 
Israel,  after  which  it  was  consigned  to 
the  hands  of  a  person  especially  ap- 
pointed to  conduct  it  to  some  desert 
and  desolate  region,  where  it  was  al- 
lowed an  unmolested  escape.  The 
mystical  or  typical  design  of  this  trans- 
action will  be  found  fully  considered  in 
a  subsequent  note.  The  Jewish  writers 
detail  a  multitude  of  additional  cere- 
monies connected  with  the  dismission 
of  the  scape-goat,  but  ns  they  are  obvi- 
ously of  a  fabulous  cast,  we  waive  en- 
tirely the  recital  of  them. 

After  the  sending  away  of  the  emis- 
sary goat,  the  high  priest  put  oflf  his 
white  vestments,  and  assuming  his 
splendid  robes,  sacrificed  a  holocaust 
for  himself  and  the  people,  and  then 
offered  another  sin-offering.  The  Jews 
assert  that  he  then  went  a  thii-d  time 
into  the  holy  of  holies  for  the  purpose 
of  bringing  away  the  censer  ;  but  this  is 
not  certain,  as  he  might  have  taken  it 
when  he  returned  the  second  time  for 
the  blood.    However  this  may  be,  "he 


Speak  unto  Aaron  thy  brother,  that 
he  b  come  not  at  all  limes  into  the 
holy  place  within  the  vail,  before 
the  mercy-seat,  which  is  upon  the 
ark  ;  that  he  die  not :  for  c  I  will 

b  Exod.  30.  10.  ch.  23.  27.  Heb.  9.  7,  and 
10.  10.  c  Exod.  25.  2i,  and  40.  34.  1  Kings 
8. 10,  11,  12. 


proceeded  afterwards  to  wash  his  hands 
and  feet  at  the  laver,  after  which  he 
went  to  the  dressing-chamber,  that  he 
might  lay  aside  his  linen  suit,  bathe 
liimself  for  the  last  time,  and  resume 
his  rich  official  dress,  in  which  to  offer 
the  evening  incense  and  trim  the  lamps 
on  the  golden  candlestick.  All  this 
done,  he  washed  his  hands  and  feet  at 
the  laver  for  the  last  time ;  went  to  the 
dressing-chamber  ;  laid  aside  liis  rich 
attire  ;  resumed  his  ordinary  wearing 
apparel  ;  and  retired  to  his  own  house 
accompanied  by  the  muhimde,  rejoicing 
that  God  had  not  mingled  his  blood 
with  his  sacrifice. 

Directions  to  the  High  Priest  as  to  eU' 
tering  into  the  Holy  Place. 
2.  Speak  unto  Aaron  thy  brother  that 
he  come  not  at  all  times  into  the  holy 
place  within  the  vail.  That  is,  within 
the  vail  separating  the  holy  from  the 
most  holy  place,  of  which  see  an  ac- 
count, Ex.  26.  33.  Into  the  holy  place 
without  the  vail,  the  officiating  priests 
were  to  enter  every  day,  morning  and 
evening,  in  the  performance  of  their 
functions  ;  but  they  were  to  know  that 
the  greatest  possible  sanctity  attached 
to  the  inner  room,  and  as  none  of  the 
common  priests  were  ever  to  enter  this 
apartment  at  all,  so  neither  was  the 
high  priest  to  do  it  at  all  times,  but  only 
on  the  particular  occasion  here  specified. 
It  is  generally  supposed,  however,  that 
this  rule  did  not  preclude  his  entrance 
into  the  holy  of  holies  to  consult  the 
oracle  on  extraordinary  and  pressing 
occasions,  which  concerned  the  national 
welfare,  as  for  instance  in  the  case  men- 
tioned,   Judg.    1.   1,-20.   18.      Comp. 


144 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


appear    in    the    cloud    upon    the '  coat,  and  he  shall  have  the  linen 
mercy-seat.  j  breeches  upon  his  flesh,  and  shall 

3  Thus  shall  Aaron  ^come  into  be  girded  with  a  linen  girdle,  and 
the  holy  place:  ewilh  a  young  j  wiih  the  linen  mitre  shall  he  be 
bullock  for  a  sin-offering,  and  a  ram  attired  :  these  are  holy  garments ; 
for  a  burnt-oflering.  i  therefore  g  shall  he  wash  his  flesh 

4  He  shall  put  on  f  the  holy  linen  '  in  water,  and  so  put  them  on. 


I  Ileb.  9.  7,  1-2,  24,  25. 
39,  42,  43.     ch.  6.  10. 


c  ch.  4,  3.    f  Exod. 
Ezek.  44.  17,  iS. 


g  Excd.  30.  20.     ch.  8.  G,  7- 


N'lm.  27.  21.  This  order  was  given  to 
Aaron,  not  merely  in  his  personal  ca- 
pacity, but  as  the  representative  of  all 
those  who  should  sustain  in  after  ages 

the  same  office. IT  For  I  ivill  appear 

in  the  cloud  upon  the  mercy  seat.  Targ. 
Jon.  *  The  glory  of  my  Shekinah  shall 
be  revealed.'  The  allusion  is  to  the 
bright  luminous  cloud  which  took  its 
station  over  the  mercy-seat,  and  between 
the  cherubims,  and  constituted  the 
standing  symbol  of  the  divine  presence. 
Others,  however,  understand  it  of  the 
cloud  of  incense  mentioned  v.  13.  But 
this  is  less  likely,  for  in  that  case  we 
might  properly  ask,  u-hat  then  was  to  be 
seen?  It  is  plainly  a  promise  that 
something  should  be  made  visible  on 
the  occasion  referred  to  ;  and  though 
we  admit  there  was  a  cloud  of  incense 
filling  the  inner  sanctuary,  yet  it  is  de- 
clared that  something  should  be  seen 
over  the  mercy-seat,  and  what  was  this 
but  the  luminous  symbol  of  the  divine 
presence?  The  cloud  of  incense  would 
no  doubt  serve  to  soften  the  splendor  of 
the  Shekinah,  and  make  the  view  toler- 
able to  the  eyes  of  the  high  priest ;  and 
it  will  be  observed  throughout  the 
Scriptures,  that  the  accompaniment  of 
a  cloud  is  generally  spoken  of  in  con- 
nexion with  the  manifestation  of  the 
visible  divine  glory.  In  like  manner, 
when  the  future  coming  of  Christ,  the 
substance  of  the  Shekinah ,  is  announced, 
it  is  said  that  he  shall  come  '  in  clouds,' 
*  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,''  &c.  Dan.  7. 13, 
Rev.  1 .  7.  The  note  of  RosenmuUer  on  ; 
the  passage  before  us  will  be  found  very  i 
important.  See  also  Vitringa^s  Observ.  | 
Sac,  1.  l.,c.  11.  I 


3.  Thus  shall  Aaron  come  into  the 
holy  place,    &c.     Keb.   IT'Tp   ^i4   i^l"^ 

j  yCtbo  el  kodesh,  which  may  be  rendered, 
approach  to  the  holy,  i.  e,  enter  upon  or 
engage  in  the  performance  of  his  lioly 
duties.  At  the  same  time,  as  ilie  ori- 
ginal word  is  in  many  instances  applitd 
to  the  tabernacle  or  temple,  it  may  here 
have  that  sense,  as  it  was  at  the  taber- 
nacle that  these  rites  were  to  be  per- 
formed. But  we  are  not  to  understand 
that  these  offerings  were  to  be  brought 
into  the  holy  place,  which  might  pos. 
sibly  be  inferred  from  the  use  of  this 
preposition.  '  To  '  would  be  a  prefera- 
ble rendering  of  the  Heb.  ^5^  cl.  The 
bullock  was  to  be  presented  as  a  sin- 
offering  for  himself,  his  family,  and  the 
whole  Levitical  priesthood.  The  rata 
for  a  burnt-offering,  to  signify  that  he 
and  his  associates  were  wholly  conse- 
crated  to,  and  to  be  wholly  employed  in, 
the  work  of  the  ministry.  The  cere- 
monies with  which  these  two  sacrifices 
were  accompanied,  are  detailed  in  the 
following  verses. 

4.  He  shall  put  on  the  holy  linen  coat, 
&c.  Heb.  kinp  "2  ri"ri  ketoneth  bad 
kodesh,  the  linen  tunic  of  holiness.  Gr. 
^iTCJva  \ivovp  riyiaffucfov,  the  sanctified 
linen  coat.  See  this  described  in  the 
Note  on  Ex.  28.  39.  There  were  eight 
different  garments  belonging  to  the  altar 
of  the  high  priest,  four  of  which,  called 
by  the  Jews  '  the  white  garments,'  and 
made  wholly  of  linen,  are  here  men- 
tioned as  to  be  worn  on  this  day.  The 
remaining  four  which  are  mentioned 
Ex.  28.  4,  were  called  *  the  golden  gar- 
ments,' from  there  being  a  mixture  of 
gold  in  them.     Inasmuch  as  the  day  of 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


145 


5  And  he  shall  take  of  ^  the  con- 
gregation of  the  children  of  Israel 
I  wo  kids  of  the  goats  for  a  sin-of- 
fering, and  one  ram  for  a  burnt- 
<ifFering. 

G  And  Aaron  shall  offer  his  bul- 
lock of  the  sin-offering,  which   is 

!i  See  ch.  4.  14.  Numb.  'i9.  11.  2  Chron, 
'^.  21.  Eira  6.  17.  Ezek.  45.  "22,  23,  '  ch. 
3  :•.     Heb.  5.  2,  and  7.  27,  28,  and  9.  7. 


yloiieinent  was  a  day  of  sorrow,  hu- 
iJiiliatiofl,  and  repentance,  the  high 
•j.riest  was  Hot  to  be  clad  in  his  rich 
j-ontifical  robe.s,  but  in  the  simple  sa 
vt'rdotal  vestments  which  were  thought 
In  be  more  appropriate  to  this  occasion. 
Both  the  priest  and  the  people  were  to 
be  reminded,  that  when  he  appeared  to 
ton.Oess  and  to  expiate  their  sins  and 
;'iis  own,  he  ought  to  be  clothed  in  the 
!;;irments  of  humility,  for  in  the  charac- 
'.>  r  of  sitmers,  the  highest  and  the  low- 
est were  upon  a  level  before  God.  These 
jrarnients,  however,  were  to  be  put  off 
in  the  after  part  of  the  day,  and  the  or- 
dinary a!  tire  of  his  office  resumed,  vv. 
23,  24. 

5.  He  shall  take  of  the  congregation 
fwo  kids  of  the  goats.  As  the  former 
sacrifices  were  for  himself,  so  these 
were  for  the  congregation  at  large,  who 
were  hereby  significantly  taught  to  re- 
gard  themselves  as  sinners  having  equal 
need  of  the  benefits  of  the  blood  of  atone- 
ment  to  give  them  acceptance  before 
God. 

6.  And  Aaron  shall  offer  his  bullock, 
&c.  That  is,  shall  present  with  a  view 
to  its  being  offered,  for  the  actual  obla- 
tion is  described  v.  11.  This  presenta- 
lion  of  the  victim  was  accompanied 
with  a  solemn  supplicatory  prayer,  the 
form  of  which  is  given  in  our  prelimi- 
nary remarks. IT  And  for  his  house. 

Chal.  '  For  the  men  of  his  house,'  By 
this  we  are  probably  to  understand  not 
me:\?ly  the  private  household  of  the 
pdest,  but  also  the  whole  body  of  infe- 
rior priests  and  Levites. 

f.  And  he  shall  take  the  two  goats  and 
13 


for  himself,  and  »  make  an  atone- 
ment for  him.self,  and  for  his  house. 

7  And  he  shall  lake  the  two  goats, 
and  present  them  before  the  Lord 
at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation. 

S  And  Aaron  shall  cast  lots  upon 
the  two  goats ;  one  lot  for  the 
Lord,  and  the  other  lot  for  the 
scape-goat. 


present  them,  &c.  Heb.  T^^aSTI  he- 
^emid,  make  to  stand.  Gr.  cTri(T€t,  shall 
station.  These  goats,  the  Rabbins  say, 
were  to  be  taken  from  the  same  flock, 
to  be  of  equal  stature,  of  the  same  color, 
and  of  the  same  value  ;  in  a  word,  com- 
plete counterparts  of  each  other  as  far 

as  practicable. IT  At  the  door  of  the 

tabernacle.  Within  the  court-yard,  as 
we  liave  previousl}'  shown.  See  Note 
on  Lev.  8.  3. 

S.  And  Aaron  shall  cast  lots  upon  the 
two  goats.  According  to  the  Jews,  the 
two  lots  might  be  either  of  wood,  stone, 
or  metal.  On  one  was  written  for  Jie- 
hovah,  and  on  the  other  for  the  scape- 
goal.  They  v.'ere  then  put  into  a  vessel, 
wliile  the  goats  stood  with  their  faces 
to  the  west.  The  vessel  was  then 
shaken,  and  the  priest  putting  in  both 
his  hands,  brought  out  a  lot  in  each. 
Being  stationed  between  the  two  goats, 
the  lot  which  was  on  his  right  hand  he 
laid  upon  the  goat  that  was  on  his 
right ;  and  that  which  was  in  his  left 
hand  he  laid  upon  the  goat  that  was  on 
his  left ;  and  thus  according  to  what 
was  written  on  the  lots,  the  scape  goat 
and  the  goat  for  sacrifice  were  deter- 
mined. 

AZAZEL,   OR   THE   SCAPE-GOAT. 

If  there  be  any  thing  calculated  to 
diminish  the  pleasure  or  damp  the  ardor 
of  the  Biblical  expositor  in  his  research- 
es, it  is  the  stern  necessity  under  which 
he  sometimes  finds  himself  placed,  of 
putting  new  interpretations  upon  fa- 
miliar texts.  The  deeper  he  penetrates 
into  the  mine  of  Scriptural  wealth,  and 


146 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


ihe  wider  llie  excavation  which  he 
makes  on  either  hand,  the  greater  is  the 
probability  of  his  here  and  there  under- 
mining the  adjacoil  surface  and  causing 
it  occasionally  to  fall  in.  But  this  will 
be  little  to  be  regretted  if  the  chasms 
thus  made  only  open  new  avenues  to 
treasures  below  vastly  more  precious 
than  any  which  had  lain  above.  Still  it 
is  always  more  or  less  painful  to  an  in 
genuous  mind  to  disturb,  in  any  degree, 
a  'throned  opinion,' even  though  that 
opinion  be  founded  in  error,  and  he  be 
able  to  substitute  in  place  of  it  an 
irrefragable  trulli.  Knowing  with  what 
fond  tenacity  men  cling  to  their  ancient 
and  accredited  forms  of  belief,  he  does 
not  like  rudely  to  assail  them,  and  it  is 
only  a  very  rampant  spirit  of  innova- 
tion that  tan  take  delight  in  breaking 
up  the  time-hallowed  associations  with 
which  certain  phrases  and  sentences  of 
holy  writ  uniformly  come  before  the 
mind.  Yet  it  is  certain  that  this  result 
is  in  many  cases  absolutely  inevitable. 
It  is  the  invariable  law  of  human  pro- 
gress, whether  in  the  department  of 
nature  or  revelation,  that  as  the  light 
breaks  forth  upon  our  previous  dark- 
ness, new  Kiodifications  should  come 
over  established  ideas.  It  would  there- 
fore be  the  height  of  injustice  to  ascribe, 
in  all  cases,  to  a  rage  of  novelty  in 
those  who  suggest  them,  the  new  inter- 
pretations which  an  advanced  state  of 
science  or  philology,  or  a  more  extended 
and  critical  inter-collation  of  passages, 
may  force  upon  their  convictions.  It  is 
to  be  remembered  that  tliey  too  have 
known  what  it  is  to  be  wedded  to  favor- 
ite interpretations,  and  can  tell  of  the 
struggle  which  it  cost  them  to  give 
ihem  up.  But  they  yielded  to  the  force 
of  evidence,  and  embraced  the  views 
which,  it  may  be,  they  at  first  strenu- 
ously withstood.  If  then  they  become 
the  patrons  of  these  views,  and  with  all 
the  requisite  array  of  learning  and  logic, 
endeavor  to  make  good  their  access  to 
other  minds,  let  it  be  presumed  it  is 
not  owing  merely  to  a  prurient  prompt- 


ing to  obtrude  a  novel  exposition  upon 
the  mind  of  the  Christian  community, 
but  to  the  stern  behests  of  the  spirit  of 
homage  to  truth,  which  will  not  let 
them  forbear  to  utter  what  they  sm- 
cerely  and  solemnly  believe  to  be  the 
sense  of  revelation. 

These  remarks  will  no  doubt  be  per- 
ceived to  have  a  direct  and  prominent 
bearing  u])on  the  task  which  we  have 
imposed  upon  ourselves,  in  the  some- 
what elaborate  investigation  of  the  sub- 
ject which  now  comes  before  us. — 
The  typical  institution  of  the  Scape- 
goat is  one  of  the  most  striking  features 
of  the  Levitical  system,  and  its  import 
as  a  symbol  has  been  so  long  rested  in 
as  shadowing  forth  the  grand  doctrine 
of  the  economical  transfer  of  sin  and 
guilt  from  believers  to  Christ,  that  one 
would  almost  as  soon  tliink  of  doubting 
ihe  fact  of  such  a  ceremony,  as  of  call- 
ing in  question  the  established  sense 
which  common  theological  consent  has 
attached  to  it.  Indeed,  it  has  been  re- 
marked, that  while  other  types  receive 
light  from  their  accomplishment  in 
Christ,  this  is  intrinsically  so  apt,  so 
felicitous,  so  obvious,  that  it  reflects 
light  upon  the  gospel  itself.  The  im- 
position of  hands  and  the  confession  of 
sins  on  the  head  of  the  emissary  goat, 
and  his  subsequent  discharge  and  escape 
into  the  wilderness,  seem  to  afford  so 
fit  an  emblem  of  the  bearing  and  carry- 
ing away  of  the  sins  of  believers  by  the 
substituted  divine  victim,  that  it  would 
appear  to  be  no  less  a  violence  done  to 
the  pious  sentiments,  than  to  the  pon- 
dering reason,  of  the  Christian,  to  at- 
tempt  to  divert  the  spiritual  application 
of  the  symbol  to  any  other  subject.  But 
fealty  to  truth  must  predominate  over 
every  other  sentiment  in  the  bosom  of 
the  humble  disciple  of  revelation.  Un- 
der its  guidance  wc  are  to  shrink  from 
no  results  to  which  we  are  legitimately 
brought.  And  in  this  spirit  of  supreme 
deference  to  the  dictates  of  truth,  we 
would  enter  upon  the  critical  exposition 
of  the  passage  before  us. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


147 


The  following  is  the  correct  rendering 
of  the  verse: — '  And  Aaron  shall  cast 
lots  upon  the  two  goals  ;  one  lot  Hin'^P 
lai-hovah,for  Jehovah,  and  the  other  lot 
";Ti5<t5?p  la-azazel,  for  AzazelJ  The 
goal  on  which  the  lot  of  Jehovah  fell 
was  to  he  brought  and  offered  up  for  a 
sill-offering,  but  the  goat  on  which  the 
lot  of  Azaze!  fell  was  to  be  '  presented 
uiive  before  Jehovah  to  make  an  atone- 
ment with  him  (Ti^^  alauv,  upon  or 
over  him),  to  let  it  go  for  Azazel  into 
the  wilderness.'  Of  the  former,  the 
blood  was  to  be  carried  wilhin  the  vail, 
and  to  be  sprinkled  upon  the  mercy- 
sejit,  and  before  the  mercy-seat,  in  order 
that  atonement  might  be  made  for  the 
holy  place  because  of  the  uncleanness 
of  ihe  cliildren  of  Israel.  When  on  the 
other  hand  the  live  goat  was  brought, 
the  high  priest  was  to  lay  both  his 
iijnds  upon  ils  head  and  to  confess  over 
il  all  the  iniquities  of  the  children  of 
Israel,  putting  tliem  upon  the  head  of 
the  goat ;  after  which  he  was  to  send  it 
by  the  hand  of  a  '  fit  man'  (-inii  i:;'^^* 
ish  itti)  that  it  might  bear  upon  it  all 
their  iniquities  mto  a  land  not  inhabited. 
"~^uch  was  the  ceremony,  and  we  are 
now  to  endeavor  to  ascertain  its  typical 
or  symbolical  scope,  and  especially 
what  is  to  be  understood  by  the  differ- 
ent  treatment  of  the  two  goats.  But  in 
order  to  do  this,  we  must  in  the  outset 
institute  a  careful  inquiry  into  the 
meaning  of  the  remarkable  term  '  Aza- 
zel,' which  occurs  in  this  connexion  for 
the  first  and  last  time,  and  on  the  true 
sense  of  which  it  is  evident  that  every 
thing  depends. 

Etymology  and  Meaning  of  the  term 
Azazel. 
To  the  eye  of  the  Hebrew  scholar, 
this  word  presents  itself  at  once  as  a 
compound,  but  its  constituent  elements, 
and  consequently  its  true  significancy, 
have  long  been  the  theme  of  learned 
debate.  Nearly  every  critical  com- 
mentator opens  his  peculiar  scholium 
upon  the  text,  with  a  kind  of  preliminary 


groan  of  *  locus  vexatissimus !'  and 
some  are  disposed  to  give  it  up  in  de- 
spair. Bochart,  whose  stupendous  eru- 
dition is  seldom  baffled  by  the  most 
formidable  difficulties,  is  here  forced  to 
the  humble  confession — '  Me  de  hac 
voce  ^TS^Ti^  Azazel  nihil  habere  satis 
cerium, /^are  nothing  certain  to  offer 
in  regard  to  this  u-ord  ;'  and  nioreover 
that  — '  prudentiores  vocem  Hebrosam 
relinquunt  dvtojjLtvicToi-.'  the  more  pru- 
dent  leave  the  Hebrew  irord  uninter' 
preted.  Under  these  circumstances  it 
can  be  little  discredit  for  one  to  fail  of 
entire  success  in  his  attempts  to  illus- 
trate the  genuine  import  of  the  term. 
The  failure  of  our  predecessors  affords 
us  a  kind  of  testvdinal  panoply  against 
the  shame  of  a  like  result. 

We  shall  first  state  the  principal  ex- 
planations which  have  been  given  of  the 
term. 

I.  Several  of  the  Rabbinical  writers, 
including  the  Targumists,  understand 
by  ^Ti<ti5  Azazel,  the  name  oi  the  place 
to  which  the  scape-goat  was  conducted. 
Thus  Jonathan,  in  liis  Targum  on  v.  10 
of  this  chapter,  renders  the  last  clause 
— '  to  send  him  away  to  death  in  a  rough 
and  rocky  place  in  the  desert  of  Tsuk.' 
Here  it  was  supposed  by  the  Talmud- 
ists,  that  the  goat  was  thrown  down  a 
steep  precipice  of  the  mountain  called 
Azazel,  and  dashed  to  pieces.  (Light- 
foot  Temp.  Ser.  p.  177,  vol.  IX.  Pitman's 
Ed.)  This  is  favored  by  the  Arabic 
versions  which  have  for  the  Hebrew 
^TKtS'^b  to  Azazel,  every  where  ^25^ 
ti^t5  ^i*  legebel  al-azaz,  to  the  Mount 
Azaz,  or  to  the  rough  mountain,  as 
azaz  properly  signifies.  And  to  give 
still  more  color  to  this  interpretation, 
R.  Saadias  Gaon  supposes  the  word  to 
he  compounded  of  ^i^  t7  and  TT5  azaz, 
so  that  the  mountain  ^T&^t3?  Azazel,  is 
by  transposition  equivalent  to  ^KT'iS' 
Azzael,  i.  e.  rough  mountain  of  God, 
just  as  David,  Ps.  36.  7,  speaks  of  lofty 
mountains,  as  '  mountains  of  God.'  But 
to  say  nolliing  of  the  license  of  altera- 
tion which  appears  in  these  readings. 


148 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


^e  find  no  intimation  of  any  mountain 
thus  denominated,  either  in  Palestine  or 
nut  of  it,  to  which  the  scape-goat  was 
led.  We  are  simplj^  informed  that  the 
!inim;il  was  to  be  conveyed  into  the 
wilderness,  without  any  specification 
(;(■  the  place.  Besides,  had  Moses  in- 
tended to  have  designated  a  particular 
I'loiintain,  he  would  doubtless  have  em- 
i  loyed  the  common  adjection  '  Mount,' 
r.iui  we  should  have  had  -Mount  Aza- 
Z-I-' just  as  we  now  have  '  Mount  Horeb,' 
'.Mount  Ebal,'  'Mount  Gerizim,'  &c. 
R^-jecting  this  interpretation  therefore 
as  untenable,  we  come  upon  another 
which  unites  the  suffrages  of  a  large 
class  of  the  more  modern  commentators. 
IF.  This  supposes  that  the  term  iti^TS^ 
Azazel  is  the  name,  not  of  a  mountain 
or  place,  but  of  the  scape-goat  itself. 
This,  it  is  contended,  is  obvTous  from 
the  structure  of  the  word,  taken  in  con- 
r.oxion  with  the  structure  of  the  sen- 
tiiice  : — '  Aaron  shall  cast  lots  upon  the 
two  goats,  one  lot  for  the  Lord,' i.  e. 
for  the  goat  which  was  to  be  sacrificed 
to  the  Lord :  *  and  the  other  lot  for 
Azazel,'  i.  e.  for  the  goat  which  was  to 
be  sent  away  into  the  wilderness.  The 
word  itselfj  it  is  maintained,  is  easily 
and  legitimately  resolved  into  ti>  ilz,  a 
goat,  and  )jTi<  azal,  to  go  aivay^  to  de- 
part^ which  gives  us  the  exact  idea  of 
the  ceremonial  use  of  the  scape-goat, 
viz.,  that  of  being  formally  sent  away 
into  the  wilderness.  The  rendering  of 
several  of  the  ancient  versions  gives,  it 
is  said,  not  a  little  confirmation  to  this 
sense  of  the  term.  Symmachus  has  for 
'  Azazel,'  rpayos  anepxojj^cvos,  the  depart- 
ing goat;  Aquila  rpayns  ai:oXc\v}iivoi,  the 

goat  set  free  or  let  loose  ;  and  the  Sept. 
0  dnuTTonnaioi,  which  Theodoret  and 
some  other  of  the  Greek  fathers  inter- 
pret as  equivalent  to  diriirejxTTd^evos,  sent 
away.  But  as  we  shall  show  in  the  se- 
quel that  there  is  great  reason  to  ques- 
tion the  correctness  of  this  interpreta- 
tion, the  rendering  of  the  lxx  must  be 
taken  here  as  important  rather  for  the 
sense  which  has  been  put  upon  it,  than 


for  its  own  direct  and  positive  testimony 
to  the  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  original. 

The  terms,  however,  above  quoied 
are  freely  used  by  the  ancient  Greek 
writers,  Theodoret,  Cyril  of  Alexandria, 
and  others,  in  reference  to  the  same 
subject,  and  the  Latin  vulgate  accords 
with  them  by  adopting  the  rendering, 
'  hircus  emissarius,'  the  emissary  goat. 
Guided  by  the  same  authorities,  our 
translators  have  rendered  the  original 
by 'scape-goat.'  But  to  this  \ie\v  of 
the  origin  and  import  of  the  Hebrew 
term,  it  must  be  admitted  that  there  are 
serious  objections,  among  which  are  the 
following. 

(1.)  It  does  not  appear  why  such  a 
singular  and  anomalous  term  should 
have  been  employed  to  express  an  idea 
so  simple  as  that  of  a  goat  sent  away. 
The  Hebrew  has  an  appropriate  word 
for  the  subject,  viz.,  t3>  tz,  or  '^"'^'O 
S(iir,goat,  and  another  n?C?3  meshul- 
/a'/i,from  Tl^ll^  shala''h,  to  dismiss,  or 
send  away,  for  the  predicate.  Why 
then  should  such  a  strange  compound 
word  be  introduced  in  this  connexion, 
especially  when  it  is  well  known,  that 
although,  in  Hebrew,  proper  names  are 
often  compounded,  yet  appellatives  very 
seldom  are?  The  presumption,  from 
the  genius  of  the  language,  is  most  un- 
questionably in  favor  of  'Azazel's' 
being  a  proper  name.  The  force  of 
this  objection  is  greatly  enhanced  by 
the  fact,  that  neither  Onkelos,  Jona- 
than, nor  the  Samaritan,  have  attempt- 
ed to  translate  or  paraphrase  the  term, 
which  they  undoubtedly  would  Imve 
done,  had  they  considered  it  merely  as 
an  appellative. 

(2.)  It  is  objected  to  this  explication 
by  Bochart,  that  it  involves  a  gramma- 
tical anomaly.  Each  of  the  goats  was 
obviously  required  to  be  a  male ;  but 
T3>  ez,  in  the  sense  of  gnat,  more  appro- 
priately signifies  a  female  ;  and  yet  it 
is  here  represented  as  compounded  with 
the  masculine  ^Tit  azal.  We  do  not 
indeed  consider  this  objection  as  insu- 
perable, as  there  is  some  reason  to  rank 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


149 


5?  dz  among  the  epicene  or  hermaphro- 
dite  nouns ;  but  we  may  still  say  that 
we  should  more  naturally  have  expected, 
that  for  the  purpose  intended,  the  unam- 
biguous ^TSiT>rm  Se'irazel  would  have 
been  employed,  especially  as  t)^i'i3>'a 
Se'irim,  is  used  in  speaking  of  the  two 
i^oats  in  the  words  immediately  pre- 
ceding. 

(3)  But  a  far  more  serious  difficulty 
i'lcauibers  the  i)roposed  interpretation, 
r!;)m  tho  structureof  the  sentence.   The 
(lireclion  in  the  text  is  thus  worded: — 
<  One  lot  shall  be  mn"'b  for  Jehovah, 
ni.d  the  other  lot  t^Ti^T^^P  M  AzazeW 
Now  the  obvious  impression  on  reading 
I  his  would  be,  that  a  personal  antithesis 
was  intended.     Jehovah  certainly,  the 
fir^t  party,  is  a  person  ;  and  as  precisely 
the  same  formula  of  expression   occurs 
ill   regard  to  the  other,  why  should  we 
not  consider  that  also  as  a  person  ?    But 
according  to  the  present  rendering,  the 
preposition  "^for,  in  the  two  successive 
clauses,  is  made  to  bear  two  entirely 
different  significations.     In  the  former 
it  denotes  to,  in  tlie  sense  oi appropria- 
tion— in  the  latter  it  denotes /or,  in  the 
sense    of  designation  to  a   particular 
purpose.     Is  tliis   probable?      Indeed, 
we  see  not  why,  if  *  AzazeP  is  to  be 
understood  as  the  name  of  one   goat, 
'  Jehovah  '  is  not  as  properly  to  be  un- 
derstood as  the  name  of  tlie  other.    But 
from  this  alternative  the  mind  instinc- 
tively shrinks  back. 

As  then  the  objection  to  this  theory 
of  the  derivation  and  meaning  of  the 
word  appears  to  be  sufficiently  valid  to 
warrant  its  rejection  ;  and  as  we  seem 
forced,  at  the  same  time,  to  adopt  only 
such  an  exposition  as  shall  assume  the 
personality  of  ihe  '  Azazel'  of  the  text, 
the  question  at  once  arises,  what  person 
can  we  suppose  to  be  intended  by  the 
appellation  ?  Tiiis  is  indeed  a  question 
of  very  grave  import,  and  we  feel  a 
strong  necessity  laid  upon  us  of  making 
peace  with  the  pre-possessions  of  our 
readers,  when  we  announce  our  firm 
conviction,  that  not  only  a  personal 
13* 


being,  but  an  evil  demon,  real  or  ima- 
ginary, is  signified  by  this  unique  and 
anomalous  term. 

In  presenting  our  purposed  array  of 
authorities  in  support  of  this  opinion, 
we  begin  with  the  translation  of  the 
Seventy.  The  words  of  our  English 
version,  '  One  lot  for  the  Lord  and  the 
other  lot  for  the  scape-goat,'  they  have 
thus  rendered: — x^ripov   Iva  tw   Kvf)Ko 

/cut  K^ijfjov  'iva  rt-i    diTurofjr:a'io),  one   lot  tO 
the  Lord,  and  one  lot  to  the  Apopom- 
peus,  or  sender-au-ay.    The  Greek  word 
a-r.)To^7rarof,  though  rendered  passively 
in  our  translation,  and  so  understood 
and  interpreted  by  several  of  the  early 
fathers,  yet  according  to  the  analogy  of 
tlie  language,  and  doubtless  according 
to   the  intention  of  the  versionists,  is 
properly  a  term  of  active  signification. 
The  reader  has  only  to  turn  to  the  learn- 
ed pages  of  Bochart  to  see  this  point 
established  beyond  a  doubt.     (Hieroz, 
P.  I.  L.  II.  c.  54.  T.  I.  p.  745-7.)     In 
this  sense  it  is  held  by  many  critics  of 
distinguished  name  to  import  one   of 
that   class   of  demons  or  deities  who 
were  called  by  the  Ld^l'ms  Dii  Aver7-un' 
ci,  or  the  deities  who  send  au-ay  or  avert 
evils  from  their   votaries,  which   was 
done  through  the  propitiating  agency 
of  prayers,  sacrifices,  and  other  offer- 
ings.    This  is  confirmed  by  Gesenius, 
from   whose   Hebrew  Lexicon  we    ex- 
tract, in  this  connexion,  what  he  says 
on  the  word  ^THT^  Azazel:  'I  render 
it   without   hesitation  the  averter,  ex- 
piator,  averruncus,  dXe^UaKog,  i.  e.  for 
bT^TS)  Azalzel,  from  the  root  ^t3>  azalj 
to  remove,  to  separate.    By  this  name  I 
suppose  is  to  be  understood  originally 
some  idol  that  was  appeased  with  sacri- 
fices, us  Saturn  and  Mars;  but  after- 
wards, as  the  names  of  idols  were  often 
transferred  to  demons,  it  seems  to  de- 
note  an   evil    demon   dwelling   in   the 
desert,  and  to  be  placated  with  victims, 
in  accordance   with   this  very  ancient 
and  also  Gentile  rite.     The  name  Aza- 
zel  is  also  used  by  the  Arabs  for  an  evil 
!  demon.    (See  Reland  de  Relig.  Moham. 


150 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  149a 


p.  189.  Meninski,h.  V.)  The  etymol- 
ogy which  we  have  above  proposed,  was 
expressed  of  old  by  the  Sept,  translator, 
although  neglected  or  misunderstood  by 
most  interpreters.    Thus  he  renders  it  v. 

8,  TO)    '  A-!T:)TTO[nTaToij    i.  e.    '  A.TTOTpi>-ITaTot. 

^  AXs^iKUKco,  averrunco  ;  v.  10,  etj  r)> 
d-oirojifiv  ad  averruncundum  ;  v.  16, 
£?f  afsffiv.  The  ecclesiastical  fathers 
have  referred  this  '  AiroirofinaTos  to  the 
goat  itself,  q.  d.  scape-goat ^  although 
obviously  in  v.  S  the  antithesis  lies  be- 
tween "^T&%T2>?  and  miTip.'  That 
drrjTo/jTraiOf  is  indeed  of  the  active  in- 
stead of  passive  signification,  not  only 
has  Bochart  clearly  proved  by  a  long 
list  of  classic  citations,  but  the  words 
of  Josephus  in  reference  to  this  rite 
throw  a  strong  light  on  this  sense  of 
the  Sept.  rendering:  '  The  goat  is  sent 
away  into  a  remote  desert  as  an  averter 
of  ills  (d-0TpoTria(TfX(,i) ,  and  a  satisfac- 
tion for  the  siiis  of  the  people.'  (An- 
tiq.  Jud.  L.  III.c.  10.) 

It  is  clear  then,  we  think,  both  that 
the  Lxx  esteemed  the  '  AzazeP  a  per- 
son, and  that  they  supposed  that  person 
to  be  a  demon,  or  deity  of  the  order  of 
*  Averrunci,'  or  averters.  That  the 
same  opinion  was  held  by  the  early 
Christians,  we  seem  to  have  clear  proof 
from  the  words  of  Origen,  who,  in  at- 
tempting to  show  that  the  devil  was 
known  in  the  times  of  Moses,  says 
among  other  things,  'He  who  is  called 
in  Leviticus  d-rro-non-aXos^  and  whom  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures  coli  Azazel;  was  no 
other  than  the  deviC  The  same  con- 
clusion was  drawn  from  this  language 
by  the  apostate  emperor  Julian,  who 
maintained  that  since  Moses  speaks  of 
the  devotement  of  a  goal  to  a  dei  ty  called 
aiTo-o^n-aToi  in  contradistinction  from 
Jehovah,  he  in  efiect  taught  the  very 
same  doctrine  as  tliat  inculcated  by  the 
heathen  theologists  respecting  the  Lii 
Averriinci.  He  was  answered  at  lengih 
by  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  but  we  are  not 
concerned  with  the  arguments  of  either, 
any  farther  than  as  they  serve  as  tesli- 
mcaies  to  the  fact  of  an  early  belief  in 


the  Christian  church  that  '  Azazel '  in 
the  Pentateuch  \vas  the  name  of  an  evil 
demon.  That  this  belief  is  to  be  traced 
to  the  demonology  of  the  Jews,  we 
think  there  can  be  no  doubt.  Rabbi 
Menah^m  in  his  commentary  on  Leviti- 
cus, says  that  Azazel  was  one  of  the 
four  principal  demons  whose  names  he 
writes  together  as  follows  :  Sainmael, 
Azazel,  Azael,  and  Mahazael.  In  like 
manner  the  apocryphal  book  of  Enoch 
makes  mention  of  Azalel,  or  as  it  was 
afterwards  written,  Azael,  among  the 
fallen  angels.  The  same  i?  affirmed  in 
the  Rabbinical  work  entitled  Zohar. 
Mercer  in  his  commentary  on  Genesis 
relates  as  a  traditional  dogn)a  of  the 
Cabalists,  that  demons  and  all  kinds  of 
malignant  spirits  were  prone  to  dwell 
in  burial  places  and  solitudes,  and  that 
Azazel  was  the  name  of  one  of  this 
class  of  beings.  Nor  are  we  I'O  forget 
tliat  the  New  Testament  allusions  make 
it  evident,  that  in  the  popular  belief  of 
the  Jews  the  deserts  and  desolate  places 
were  the  chosen  haunts  of  the5«e  Ibul 
fiends.  Our  Lord  underwent  his  tempt- 
ation from  the  devil  in  the  wilderness, 
and  it  was  hither  that  the  legion  of  evil 
demons  is  said  to  have  driven  the  pos- 
sessed man  ere  they  were  ejected  from 
him  by  the  word  of  Christ.  It  is,  more- 
over, through  dry  and  desert  places  that 
the  unclean  spirit  is  represented  by  the 
Savior  as  walking  after  he  had  quilted 
the  body  of  the  demoniac.  It  goes  also 
strikingly  to  confirm  this  view  of  the 
subject,  that  those  desert-deities  were 
generally  conceived  of  as  having  the 
semblance  of  goats,  or  rough,  hairy, 
shaggy  creatures,  corresponding  with 
the  Satyrs  of  the  Greek  and  Roman 
mythology,  which  were  sylvan  deiiiea 
or  demigods,  represented  as  monsters, 
half  man  and  half  goat,  having  horns  ok 
their  heads,  hairy  bodies,  wiih  the  fee\ 
and  tail  of  the  goat.  Thus  tlie  prophev 
Isaiah  in  predicting  the  ruin  of  Babylon, 
says,  ch.  13.  21,  '  Wild  beasts  of  th» 
desert  shall  lie  there,  and  their  houses 
shall  be  I'uU  of  doleful  creatures,  and 


B.  C.  1490.3 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


151 


ow/ls  shall  dwell  there,  and  satyrs 
(DT^y'i^  Se'irim,  goats)  shall  dance 
there  ;'  where  the  Gr.  has  Saijjovta^  de- 
mons;  the  Vulg.  '  Pilosi,'  shaggy  or 
hairy  animals  ;  and  ihe  Glial. '  Demons.' 
Tiie  popular  ideas  of  the  external  fornn 
and  appearance  of  the  devil  among  the 
rude  and  ignorant  of  nearly  all  nations, 
Loth  ancient  and  mod'ern,  easily  connect 
themselves  willi  these  early  traditions, 
and  the  language  of  holy  writ  in  the 
following  passage  goes  clearly  to  evince 
the  origin  of  the  vulgar  associations. 
Lev.  17.  7,  '  And  they  shall  no  more 
offer  their  sacrifices  unto  devils  (jZ'y^'S'O 
Va.  goats)  after  whom,'  &c.  2  Chron. 
11.15,  'And  -Jie  ordained  him  priests 
for  the  high  places,  and  for  the  devils 
i'QI'yCj  goats)  and  for  the  calves  which 
he  hud  made.'  On  the  peculiar  usage 
of  the  original  term,  Kimchi  in  his  Lex- 
icon (voc.  '^■'^""J  San)  remarks,  'They 
(demons)  are  called  goals,  because  they 
appear  in  tJie  shape  of  goats  to  their 
votaries.'  It  would  seem  then  that 
there  are  good  grounds  for  recognizing 
in  this  term  a  designed  allusion  to  some 
kind  of  desert-demon  to  whom  the  sec- 
ond goat  was  in  a  manner  dedicated, 
devoted,  or  consigned,  but  not  sacrificed, 
as  this  would  be  a  direct  contravention 
of  the  precept  just  quoted  from  Lev. 
17.  7,  *  They  shall  no  more  offer  their 
sacrifices  unto  devils.' 

Sliil  the  grand  question  remains  to 
be  solved,  why  llie  goat  was  consigned 
or  devoted  at  all  to  Azazel  ?  The  Rab- 
bins, who  for  the  most  part  understand 
Azazel  to  mean  the  evil  spirit,  have 
advanced  some  singular  notions  on  this 
subject.  Substituting  the  name  Sam- 
mael  for  Azazel,  R.  Eliezer  scruples 
not  to  say,  that  they  offer  a  gift  to 
Samniael,  or  Satan,  on  the  day  of  atone- 
ment, lest  he  should  make  their  obla- 
tions fruitless.  Indeed,  we  are  told 
that  it  became  a  current  proverb  among 
the  Hebrews,  *  A  gift  to  Sammael  on 
the  day  of  atonement.'  The  idolatrous 
character  of  this  offering,  Moses  Gerun- 
dinensis  endeavors,  indeed,  to  explain 


away,  but  still  in  such  terms  as  assure 
us  of  the  fact : — '  Our  intention  when 
we  let  loose  the  goat,  is  not  to  present 
him  as  an  oblation  to  Sammael.  God 
forbid  I — but  our  desire  is  to  do  the  will 
of  our  Creator,  who  has  delivered  to  us 
such  a  commandment.'  What  is  yet 
stranger,  some  of  the  more  ancient 
Christians,  who  used  the  Greek  transla- 
tion of  the  Seventy,  were  thence  led  to 
imagine  that '  of  the  two  goats,  one  was 
sacrificed  to  God,  and  the  other  was  sent 
into  the  desert  to  propitiate  an  evil  and 
impure  demoa,  thus  venerated  as  an 
apopompean  spirit.'  For  this  impiety 
tliey  are  deservedly  censured  by  Cyril 
and  Procopius  ;  and  it  is  well  remarked 
by  i».ouIensis,  that  *  the  goat  was  not 
sacrificed  to  the  demon  Azazel,  for  it  is 
only  said  that  it  was  conveyed  into  the 
desert ;  for  it  were  a  great  disgrace  to 
the  God  of  the  Hebrews,  if  he  could  not 
deliver  his  worshippers  from  demons, 
and  if  they  were  compelled  to  propitiate 
the  devil  lest  he  should  hurt  them.* 
And  in  tliis  connexion  we  may  advert 
to  the  opinion  of  Spencer,  (De  Legib. 
Heb.  L.  iii.  Dissert,  viii.  p.  1040),  who 
takes  the  name  '  Azazel,'  as  compound- 
ed of  TJJ  az,  strong,  and  ^Tfi^  azal.  to 
depart ;  implying  the  strong  receder, 
or  powerful  apostate,  an  appropriate 
denomination,  he  supposes,  of  the  devil 
as  the  arch  rebel  and  revolter  ;  to  which 
may  be  added,  that  he  and  other  beings 
of  liis  class  were  prone,  according  to 
popular  estimation,  to  withdraw  tiiem- 
selves  from  all  frequented  places,  and 
hover  about  dreary  solitudes,  tombs, 
ruins,  and  deserts.  The  reasons  which 
he  assigns  for  the  extraordinary  rite  of 
the  consignment  of  the  goat  to  Azazel, 
are  the  three  following:  (1.)  That  the 
animal  thus  laden  with  the  sins  of  the 
people  and  delivered  up  to  the  demon, 
might  denote  the  wretched  lot  of  all 
sinners.  (2.)  That  the  dedication  of 
this  goat  thus  circumstanced  to  an  evil 
demon  might  serve  to  show  the  Israel- 
ites the  impurity  of  apostate  spirits,  and 
so  divert  and  take  them  off,  and  others 


152 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


also,  from  all  pronenoss  to  hold  inter- 
course with  such  beings.  (3.)  That 
since  their  sins  were  sufficiently  ex- 
piated by  the  piacular  goat  sent  out  to 
Azazel,  they  might  more  willingly  ab- 
stain from  all  application  to  the  apo- 
pompean  gods  of  the  Gentiles. 

These  reasons,  though  free  from  the 
absurd  impiety  of  the  Rabbinical  super- 
stition, strike  the  sober  mind  as  at  once 
far-fetched  and  fanciful,  and  we  are  shut 
up  to  the  necessity  of  seeking  for  a 
more  satisfactory  solution  of  the  prob- 
lem. In  attempting  this,  let  us  recur 
again  to  the  incidents  mentioned  in  the 
text  as  connected  with  this  singular 
transaction.  V.  9,  10:  'And  Aaron 
shall  bring  the  goat  upon  which  the 
Lord's  lot  fell,  and  offer  him  for  a  sin- 
offering.  But  the  goat  on  which  the  lot 
fell  for  Azazel,  shall  be  presented  alive 
before  the  Lord,  to  make  an  atonement 
with  him  (T^^S'  ^SS?  lekappir  alauv, 
to  expiate  or  atone  over  or  upon  him,) 
to  let  him  go  for  Azazel  into  the  wil- 
derness.' And  then  again,  after  de- 
scribing the  ceremonies  of  the  slain- 
goat,  he  adds,  v.  21,  22,  *  He  shall  bring 
the  live  goat,  and  Aaron  shall  lay  both 
his  hands  upon  the  head  of  the  live  goat, 
and  confess  over  him  all  the  iniquities 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  all  their 
transgressions  in  all  their  sins,  putting 
them  upon  the  head  of  the  goat,  and 
shall  send  him  away  by  the  hand  of  a 
fit  man  into  the  wilderness:  and  the 
goat  shall  bear  upon  him  all  their  in- 
iquities unto  a  land  not  inhabited:  and 
he  shall  let  go  the  goat  into  the  wilder- 
ness.' 

Typical  Import  of  the  Scope-Goat. 

The  common  interpretation  given  by 
divines  of  this  typical  rite — an  interpre- 
tation buiU^  for  the  most  part  on  the 
presumption  that  '  Aznzel  '  was  the 
name  of  the  scape-goatj  is  substantially 
this  : — The  two  goats  constituted  in  fact 
but  one  offering,  having  a  direct  typical 
reference  to  Christ,  who  laid  down  his 
life  for  us  in  the  character  of  a  sacrificial 


victim,  and  to  whom  the  load  of  oui 
iniquities  was  transferred  by  imputa- 
tion. But  Christ  is  contemplated  in 
this  type  in  a  two-fold  aspect,  one  as 
dying  for  our  sins,  the  other  as  rising 
again  for  our  justification.  But  to  this 
two-fold  phasis  of  the  mediatorial  work 
of  Christ,  no  single  offering  could  suit- 
ably correspond.  A  double  oblation,  it 
is  supposed,  was  made  necessary  by  the 
very  nature  of  the  case.  One  goat  slain 
could  only  show  us  a  sacrificed  Savior  ; 
it  could  not  show  us  a  living  Savior. 
One  could  not  exhibit  him  '  who  liveth 
and  was  dead,  and  is  alive  forevermore.' 
There  must  be  two  to  convey  the  great 
truth,  that  Christ  was  '  put  to  death  in 
the  flesh,  but  quickened  by  the  Spirit ;' 
that  '  he  was  delivered  for  our  offences, 
and  raised  again  for  our  justification  -' 
that  '  he  was  crucified  through  weak- 
ness, and  yet  liveth  by  the  power  of 
God.'  All  this,  it  is  held,  is  significant iy 
taught  by  the  two-fold  symbol  of  the 
slain  and  the  emissary  goat,  the  one 
designed  as  a  vicarious  sacrifice  for  sin, 
the  other  as  a  living  memorial  of  its 
benign  effects.  In  the  latter  we  see  the 
sins  of  believers  carried  away^  and  re- 
moved  from  them  as  far  as  the  east  is 
from  the  west  ;  in  a  word,  as  lost,  blot- 
led  out,  extinguished  forever  from  the 
divine  remembrance. 

This  view  of  the  typical  purport  of 
the  rite  before  us  is  very  ancient,  hav- 
ing been  held  by  Theodoret,  Cyril,  Au- 
gustin,  and  Procopius,  and  while  inge- 
nious and  plausible  in  itself,  it  does  not, 
that  we  are  aware,  go  counter  to  the 
general  genius  of  the  Mosaic  economy, 
distinguished,  as  it  was,  by  a  vast  and 
unspeakable  richness  of  symbolical 
imagery.  At  the  same  time,  we  cannot 
but  suggest,  that  this  explanation  labors 
under  a  liability  to  two  objections  of 
considerable  weight.  (1.)  The  sins  of 
Israel,  in  the  typical  ceremony,  were 
laid  upon  the  head  of  the  live  goat, 
which  was  then,  as  a  figure  of  the  risen, 
justified,  and  justifying  Savior,  to  be 
sent   away   into   the  wilderness.     But 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVL 


153 


how  does  this  correspond  with  the  fiicts 
in  regard  lo  the  Auiilype.  Clirist  bore 
the  sins  of  men,  not  as  rising,  but  as 
dying.  He  rose  from  the  dead,  and  en- 
tered into  glory  '  without  sin  ;'  nor  do 
we  any  where  learn  that  he  continues 
after  liis  death  to  sustain  the  same  ex- 
piatory office  that  he  did  at  his  death. 
On  the  contrary,  we  are  assured  that  he 
was  '  once  offered  to  bear  the  sins  of 
many ;'  and  that  *  by  this  one  offering 
he  hath  forever  perfected  them  that  be- 
lieve.' (2.)  We  learn  from  v.  26,  that 
'  he  that  let  go  the  goat  for  Azazel  was 
to  wash  his  clothes  and  bathe  his  flesh 
in  water,  and  afterwards  come  into  the 
camp.'  From  this  it  appears,  that  con- 
tact with  the  goat  made  the  person  who 
handled  him,  even  for  the  purpose  of 
sending  him  away,  unclean.  This  was 
in  consequence  of  the  sins  with  which 
the  scape-goat  was  putatively  charged 
and  loaded  previous  to  his  dismission. 
But  as  no  uncleanness  can  be  supposed 
to  attach  to  Clirist  subsequent  to  his 
resurrection,  it  is  difficult  to  conceive 
how  any  ceremonial  taint  should  cleave 
to  his  representing  symbol. 

Influenced  by  these  and  other  consid- 
erations, and  dissenting  moreover,  from 
the  opinion  that  *  Azazel '  was  the  name 
of  the  goat,  Faber,  following  the  fool- 
steps  of  Witsius,  has  propounded  the 
following  solution  of  the  spiritual  pur- 
port of  the  rite.  (Hor.  Mos.  vol.  ii.  p. 
259,  Coinp.  Witsius  on  the  Covenants, 
vol.  ii.  p.  230.)  *  Christ,'  he  remarks, 
'  laid  down  his  life  for  us  that  we  might 
go  free  ;  and  this  sacrifice  of  himself 
upon  the  cross,  was  typified  by  every 
bloody  sacrifice  under  the  Law,  and 
therefore,  among  others,  by  the  piacular 
devotement  of  that  goat,  which  fell  by 
lot  to  Jehovah.  Here  we  have  the  great 
mystery  of  the  gospel,  so  well  described 
by  the  apostle,  as  that  which  could 
alone  exhibit  God  both  just  and  yet  the 
justifier  of  them  that  believe  in  Christ 
Jesus.  But  this  is  not  the  whole  of  our 
Lord's  character.  At  the  very  com- 
mencement of  the  Bible,  it  was  foretold 


that,  although  the  promised  seed  of  the 
woman  shall  finally  bruise  the  head  of 
the  serpent,  yet  the  serpent  should  first 
bruise  his  heel  or  mortal  part.  If  then 
the  serpent  was  to  bruise  his  mortal 
part,  that  mortal  part  must  needs  be 
delivered  over  to  the  power  of  the  ser- 
pent ;  for  of  himself,  he  could  possess 
no  such  superiority,  even  during  a  single 
moment.  Hence  it  will  follow,  that 
Satan,  bent  only  on  satiating  liis  own 
malice,  and  unconscious  that  he  was 
actually  subserving  the  divine  purposes 
of  mercy,  was  the  agent  who,  through 
his  earthly  tools  effected  the  death  of 

the  Messiah Such   being  the 

Scriptural  character  of  our  Lord,  it  is 
evident  that  no  single  type  can  perfectly 
exhibit  it  in  both  its  parts.  The  various 
bloody  sacrifices  of  the  Law  prefigured 
it  in  one  part,  viz.,  that  which  respected 
the  atonement  made  with  God  for  the 
sins  of  man;  but  they  spoke  nothing 
concerning  its  other  part,  viz.,  that 
uhich  respected  the  delivering  up  of 
the  Messiah  to  the  infernal  serpent, 
with  the  permissive  power  of  bruising 
his  mortal  frame.  On  this  second  part 
they  were  silent ;  and  if  it  were  at  all 
to  be  shadowed  out  under  the  ceremo- 
nial law,  such  a  purpose  could  only  be 
effected  by  the  introduction  of  a  new 
type,  connected  indeed  with  the  usual 
sacrificial  type,  but  kept  nevertheless 
studiously  distinct  from  it.  A  double 
type,  in  short,  must  be  employed,  if  the 
character  of  Christ  under  its  two-fold 
aspect  was  to  be  completely  prefigured. 
Now  the  two  goats,  which  are  jointly 
denominated  a  sin-offering,  (Lev. 
16.5,)  constitute  a  type  of  this  iden- 
tical description.  The  two  together 
present  ns  with  a  perfect  symbolical 
delineation  of  our  Lord's  official  char- 
acter, while  he  was  accomplishing  the 
great  work  of  our  redemption.  The 
goat  which  fell  to  the  lot  of  Jehovah 
was  devoted  as  a  sin-offering,  after  the 
manner  of  any  other  sin-offt-ring,  by  its 
being  piacularly  slain.  This  type  re. 
presented   the   Messiah  in  the  act  of 


154 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


satisfying  the  strict  justice  of  God,  by 
consenting  to  lay  down  his  life  sacri- 
ficially  in  our  stead,  and  on  our  behalf. 
But  the  goat  which  fell  to  the  lot  of 
Azazel  was  first  imputatively  loaded 
with  the  sins  of  the  whole  people,  and 
was  then  symbolically  given  up  to  the 
rage  of  the  evil  spirit,  by  being  turned 
loose  into  the  wilderness,  which  was 
deenjed  his  favorite  terrestrial  haunt. 
This  second  type  represented  the  Mes- 
siah burdened  with  the  transgressions 
of  all  mankind,  deserted  for  a  season  by 
his  heavenly  Father,  and  delivered  into 
the  hand  of  the  prince  of  darkness,  with 
a  full  permission  granted  to  the  apos- 
tate angel,  of  morially  bruising  his  heel 
or  human  nature.  Such  I  conceive  to 
be  the  plain  and  obvious  interpretation 
of  the  ceremonial  which  was  observed 
in  the  great  day  of  atonement.  Yet 
from  a  part  of  the  ordinance  respecting 
the  live  goat,  I  think  it  not  improbable 
that  a  special  previsionary  regard  may 
have  been  mysteriously  had  to  a  very 
remarkable  part  of  our  Savior's  history. 
When  the  goat  was  delivered  up  to  tiie 
malice  of  Satan,  it  was  turned  loose 
into  the  tenderness.  In  a  similar  man- 
ner, *  Jesus  was  led  up  of  the  Spirit 
into  the  wilderness,  to  be  tempted  of 
the  devil '  (Matt.  4.  1)  ;  and  here,  when 
he  had  fasted  forty  days,  and  was  after- 
wards an  hungered,  the  fiend  commenced 
upon  him  that  series  of  attacks  which 
terminated  only  with  his  death  upon 
the  cross.  Thus  perfect  throughout  is 
the  similitude  between  the  type  and  the 
antitype.' 

This  view  we  submit  to  the  reader 
for  what  he  may  deem  it  worth.  If  we 
had  not  what  we  esteem  a  still  better 
solution  to  propose,  we  should  be  in- 
clined to  adopt  it,  at  least  in  preference 
to  the  common  and  accredited  mode  of 
explication.  But  we  think  we  can  point 
out  '  a  more  excellent  way  '  of  solving 
the  mystery  of  the  scape-goat,  and  to 
this  we  now  invite  attention,  simply 
premising  that  a  hint  contained  in  a 
quoiatioa  from  the  old  commentator, 


Conrad  Pellican,  whose  own  work  we 
have  never  seen,  contains  ihe  germ  of 
the  exposition,  which  we  have  expanded 
to  much  fuller  dimensions,  and  sustain- 
ed by  a  new  array  of  evidence,  in  the 
remarks  that  follow. 

It  is  evident,  that  in  making  out  the 
proof  that  *  Azazel '  signifies  something 
else  than  the  scape-goat  itself,  a  new 
complexion  is  given  at  once  to  the 
whole  passage.  If  the  falling  of  the 
lot  to  Azazel  indicated  the  consignment 
of  the  emissary  goat  to  some  real  or 
imaginary  spirit  of  evil,  then  it  is  pal- 
pable that  a  typical  or  symbolical  scope 
entirely  different  Irom  the  common  one 
must  be  recognized  in  the  ceremony. 
We  do  not  perceive  in  what  sense,  or 
with  what  propriety,  an  animal  could 
be  dedicated  to  Satan,  and  still  be  con- 
sidered as  a  type  of  Christ.  '  Satan 
cometh,  and  hath  nothing  in  me,'"  said 
the  Savior  himself  when  on  earth,  and 
we  cannot  but  ask,  on  what  ground  a 
typical  rite  is  to  be  referred  to  Him, 
the  direct  and  prominent  import  of 
which  expressed  a  peculiar  appropria- 
tion to  Satan,  as  of  something  to  which 
he  had  an  acknowledged  and  paramount 
right.  Surely  no  one  can  be  insensible 
to  the  incongruity  which  reigns  through- 
out the  whole  transaction,  viewed  in 
this  light.  However  plausible  the  argu- 
ments in  favor  of  such  an  interpretation, 
we  shrink  instinctively  from  it  as  de- 
rogatory to  the  pure  and  sinless  nature, 
and  the  holy  designation  of  Jesus. 
Whatever  else  n)ight  liave  been  shadow- 
ed forth  by  this  institute  of  the  Jewish 
law,  we  are  sure  that  we  are  not  to  look 
for  a  prefiguration  of  Him  who  was 
dedicated  as  a  divine  Deodand  to  God, 
in  a  goat  set  apart  by  mystic  ceremo- 
nies to  the  devil. 

What,  then,  are  we  to  understand  by 
this  significant  item  in  the  ordinances 
of  the  great  day  of  atonement  ?  Some- 
thing of  a  symbolical  character  all  will 
admit  in  the  di!^mission  of  llie  goat, 
loaded  with  sin,  into  the  wilderness. 
Whatever  the  implication  may  be,  the 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVI 


155 


ceremony  itself  cannot,  we  think,  im-  j 
ply  that  the  animal,  considered  in  its  ! 
emblematic  character,  was  regarded  by 
God  as  acceptable,  or  looked  upon  wiilj  , 
a  complacent  eye,  but  rather  the  reverse.  I 
It  was  something  wliich  was  jmt  aicay  ! 
as  from  a  feeling  of  aversion,  while  on  ; 
the  contrary,  the  other  goat  was  retain-  j 
ed,  and,  when  turned  into  a  saciificial  j 
offering,  came  up  before  the  Lord  as  a  j 
sweet-scented  savor.  This  utterly  di- 
verse treatment  and  disposal  of  the  two 
animals,  compels  us  to  recognize  in 
e-ich  an  anlilypical  substance,  wliich 
was  to  meet  with  corresponding  enter- 
tainment at  the  hands  of  Jehovah.  The 
one  victim  pointed  to  a  substance  which 
.was  to  be  pre-eminently  well  pleasing 
to  him  ;  the  other,  one  from  which  he 
would  turn  away  with  displacency  and 
loathing.  The  former  plainly  received 
Its  rea!izati(5n  in  Christ,  the  beloved 
Son,  in  whom  his  soul  delighted;  the 
latter  must  be  accomplished  in  some- 
thing which,  in  comparison,  he  abhors. 
In  looking  around  for  an  object  which 
sliall  answer  these  conditions,  we  know 
of  none  that  so  fully  and  so  fairly  meets 
the  demand  as  the  Jewish  people  them- 
selves. It  is  here,  if  we  mistake  not, in 
the  apostate,  derelict,  and  reprobate 
race  of  Israel,  rejected  (not  irrevocably) 
for  their  rejection  of  the  Messiah,  that 
we  behold  the  substantiated  truth  of  the 
shadow  before  us. 

Certain  it  is  that  this  signal  event  of 
the  judicial  rejection  of  the  covenant 
jjcopie,  was  in  t!ie  prescience  of  Jeho- 
vah ages  before  it  occurred,  and  we  see 
nothing  incongruous  in  the  idea,  that  it 
might  have  been  mystically  fore-shown 
by  some  appropriate  rite  in  the  ancient 
economy.  And  if  this  be  granted,  what 
occasion  more  suitable  for  the  exhibition 
of  this  rite,  than  that  of  the  great  na- 
tional  festival  of  expiation,  in  which 
the  atoning  death  of  the  divine  substi- 
tute for  sinners  was  most  significantly 
set  forth?  This  day  was  replete  with 
solemn  prognostics  of  that  still  more 
momentous  day  when  Chri-.t,  the  true 


victim,  should  make  his  soul  an  offering 
for  sin  ;  and  we  well  know  that  it  was 
in  putting  tlie  jNIessiah  to  death  on  that 
occasion,  that  that  wicked  nation  were 
so  to  concentrate  and  consummate  their 
guilt  as  to  necessitate,  to  the  divine 
counsels,  tiieir  exclusion  from  the  pale 
of  tlie  covenant,  at  least  for  a  long  lapse 
of  centuries.  We  may  indeed  admit 
that  such  a  typical  intimation  would  be 
very  apt  to  be  in  its  own  nature  obscure. 
It  would  be  one  of  peculiarly  latent 
meaning  for  the  time  then  being,  for  the 
people  would  be  slow  to  read  the  sen- 
tence of  their  own  rejection  in  any  of 
I  the  national  riles,  and  in  order  that  it 
;  might  not  be  read,  it  was  doubtless  de- 
I  signcdly  shrouded  in  a  veil  not  easily 
penetrated,  and  couched  in  an  action  so 
closely  connected  with  another  of  dif- 
ferent import,  that  it  was  in  itself  easily 
susceptible  of  a  construction  apparently 
sound,  yet  really  fallacious  and  false. 

We  are  well  aware  that  it  may  be 
objected  to  this  mode  of  viewing  the 
transaction,  that  the  sins  of  the  con- 
gregation were,  by  putative  transfer, 
laid  upon  the  head  of  the  emissary  goat, 
as  their  appointed  substitute,  in  whose 
rfismission  they  were  to  find  remission. 
The  language,  moreover,  would  seem 
to  be  peculiarly  exjtress  to  tliis  effect, 
when  it  is  said  that  the  scape-goat  should 
be  '  presented  alive  before  the  Lord,  to 
make  an  atonement  with  him,  to  let 
him  go  for  Azazel  into  the  wilderness.' 
How  then  does  this  comport  with  the 
idea  of  the  Jewish  peojde  being  the 
substance  of  the  type  in  question? 
Does  it  not  follow  that  ihey  were  them- 
selves  the  victim  of  expiation  for  their 
own  sins,  instead  of  their  sins  being 
laid  upon  Christ,  the  grand  propitiatioa 
for  the  sins  ol'  the  world  ?  We  answer, 
undoubtedly  it  docs.  This,  in  fact,  we 
conceive  to  be  the  very  aim  and  drift  of 
the  ceremony  before  us,  viz.,  to  intimate 
that  the  guilty  race  were  to  '  bear  their 
iniquity,'  that  they  were,  upon  their 
rejection  of  the  Messiah,  to  be  sent 
forth  into  the  wilderness  of  the  world, 


i56 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


scattered  over  the  broad  surface  of  the 
earth,  and  after  being  loaded  with  the 
guilt  of  that  blood  which  they  impre- 
cated upon  their  own  and  the  heads  of 
their  children,  to  be  delivered  over  to 
the  dominion  of  darkness,  of  which  Sa- 
tan, under  the  mystic  denomination  of 
Azazel,  was  I  he  reputed  prince  and  po- 
tentate. This  we  are  certain  was  the 
fact  in  regard  to  the  great  body  of  the 
outcast  nation  of  Israel  according  to 
the  flesh,  and  as  before  remarked,  we 
see  no  grounds  to  question  that  an  event 
of  so  much  moment  should  have  been 
darkly,  yet  significantly,  sliadowed 
forth  in  the  typical  ordinances  of  that 
solemn  day  which  celebrated  prospect- 
ively the  events  of  the  atonement.  Nor 
do  v.'e  read  any  insuperable  objection 
to  this  in  the  language  of  the  institute 
itself;  '  to  make  an  atonement  with 
him,  and  to  let  him  go  for  a  scape-goal 
(to  or  for  Azazel)  into  the  wilderness.' 
We  have  already  intimated  that  the 
original  I^^DS^  "^^-^  lekappcr  dlauv, 
properly  imports,  to  make  an  atonement 
over,  upon,  or  for  him,  instead  of  u-ith 
or  by  him,  instrumentally,  as  rendered 
in  our  translation.  The  goal  in  this 
act  was  plainly  considered  as  the  su6- 
ject,  and  not  the  medium,  of  atonement 
or  reconciliation.  The  interposition  of 
"the  particle  ^5>  is  extremely  common 
after  the  verb  ^t'D  kaphar,  to  denote 
the  object  of  expiation  or  pacification, 
expressed  by  that  Hebrew  term.  Thus, 
Lev.  4.  20, '  And  the  priest  shall  make 
an  atonement  for  them  (CniS'  ^5lD  kip- 
per alchcm),  and  it  shall  be  forgiven 
them,'  i.  e.  the  congregation.  So  also 
in  V.  18  of  this  chapter  : — '  And  he  shall 
go  out  unto  the  altar  that  is  before  the 
Lord,  and  make  an  atonement  for  it, 
(T^py 'ISj  kipper  (ilauv) .''  So  again, 
V.  30 — '  For  on  that  day  shall  the  priest 
make  an  atonement  for  you  (It'D'^ 
t3"'iy  yekapper  ah'kem).'  In  v.  33, 
the  same  usage  repeatedly  occurs  : — 
'  And  he  shall  make  an  atonement  for 
0>y)  the  priests,  and  for  (b^)  all  the 
people  of  the  congregation.'  From  these 


instances  of  tlie  usus  loquendi,  which 
might  be  indefinitely  multiplied,  it 
would  seem  to  be  indisputable  that  the 
goat  was  not  viewed  in  this  connexion 
as  the  instrument^  but  as  the  object  of 
the  expiation,  and  a  reference  to  the 
Concordance  we  believe  will  show  that 
the  preposition  \'$  al  is  never  used  in  a 
similar  connexion  wiih  ^tS  kaphar, 
but  as  denoting  the  person  or  thing 
which  is  the  object  of  the  atonemeut. 
Our  English  translation  therefore  is  un- 
questionably wrong  in  rendering  it  in 
this  place  '  with  liim,'  instead  of  over, 
upon,  or  for  liim.' 

But  still  it  may  be  asked  how  an 
atonement  or  reconciliation  was  made 
for,  over,  or  on  account  of,  the  scape- 
goat, seeing  that  all  tlie  action  men- 
tioned was  confined  to  the  animal  itself? 
We  refer  for  answer  to  the  passage 
under  consideration,  and  beg  that  its 
phraseology  may  be  carefully  scanned. ; 
'  to  make  an  atonement  for  him,  to  let 
him  go  to  Azazel  into  the  wilderness.' 
Our  translators  have  here  gratuitously 
inserted  the  word  '  and'  before  '  to  let 
him  go,'  which  is  wanting  in  the  origi- 
nal, and  the  absence  of  which  aflbrds, 
we  believe,  the  true  clue  to  the  inter- 
pretation. The  latter  clause  is  exe- 
getical  of  the  former.  The  atonement 
was  made  by  the  letting  go  of  the  goat 
to  Azazel.  He  was  consigned  over,  by 
way  of  judgment  and  punishment,  to  the 
jurisdiction  of  Satan,  as  the  type  of  a 
similar  allotment  towards  the  recreant 
and  rejected  Jews.  It  was  thus,  and 
thus  only,  that  the  Most  High  was  to 
be  propitiated  for  their  offences,  and 
we  have  only  to  appeal  to  the  truth  of 
history  to  learn  how  accurately  the  fact 
has  corresponded  with  ihe  typical  pre- 
diction. 

But  this  is  to  be  shown  more  fully  by 
reference  to  tlie  evangelical  narrative, 
where,  in  the  details  of  the  crucifixion- 
scene,  we  may  expect  to  rcc(  gnize  the 
fulfilment  of  ilie  01dTestan)ent  earnests. 
There  we  behold  the  elect  and  accepted 
victim  meekly  submitting  to  the  fearful 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


157 


death  which  the  body  of  the  nation  cla- 
morously demanded,  and  by  demanding 
which  they  sealed  their  own  doom  of 
dereliction.  And  as  if  on  purpose  to 
make  the  coincidences  more  remarka- 
ble, the  controlling  providence  of  God 
so  orders  it  that  almost  by  the  decision 
of  a  lot  Barabbas  is  released  and  Jeb;us 
retained  for  execution.  In  this  incident 
we  are  furnished  with  a  striking  coun- 
terpart to  the  ceremonies  of  tlie  expia- 
tion-day. In  the  release  of  the  robber 
Barabbas  we  see  the  lot  coming  up  with 
the  inscription,  '  for  Azazel,'  while  in 
the  coiidenmation  of  Christ,  we  read  the 
opposite  allotment,  '  for  Jehovah.'  We 
cannot  refrain  from  regarding  Barabbas 
in  this  transaction  as  an  impersonation, 
a  representative  type,  of  the  whole 
people  to  whom  he  belonged,  and  in  the 
words  of  Peter  on  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
we  more  than  imagine  tliat  we  see  de- 
scribed the  very  process  of^ selection  and 
rejection  which  stands  forth  before  us 
in  the  prescribed  ceremonies  of  the  Jew- 
ish Law  ;  Acts  3.  13-15 :  '  The  God  of 
Abraham,  and  of  Isaac,  and  of  Jacob, 
the  God  of  our  father  has  glorified  his 
Son  Jesus,  whom  ye  delivered  up,  and 
denied  him  in  the  presence  of  Pilate, 
when  he  was  determined  to  let  him  go. 
But  ye  denied  the  Holy  One  and  the 
Just,  and  desired  a  murderer  to  be 
granted  unto  you  ;  and  killed  the  Prince 
of  life,  whom  God  hath  raised  from  the 
dead.'  Here  we  have  the  typical  scene 
of  the  wilderness  vividly  enacted  before 
us  in  its  substantiated  realities  of  a  far 
different  place  and  a  far  distant  age. 
In  Barabbas  released,  with  all  his 
crimes  upon  his  head,  in  accordance 
with  the  emission  of  the  goat  loaded 
with  the  sins  of  the  congregation,  we 
see  a  lively,  and  we  doubt  not,  a  de- 
signed, emblematic  presentation  of  the 
iact  of  the  judicial  thrusting  forth  of 
that  covenant  race,  with  the  weight  of 
the  imprecated  curse  of  God  abiding 
upon  them  from  one  generation  to  ano- 
ther. Nay,  so  precise  is  the  accordance 
14 


between  the  items  of  the  adumbration 
and  of  the  accomplishment,  that  we  be- 
hold in  Pilate  the  fore-shadowed  'fit 
man  '  by  whom  the  discharged  goat  was 
led  forth  into  the  wilderness.  '  He 
shall  send  him  away  by  the  hand  of  a 
fit  man  into  the  wilderness.'  The  orig- 
inal is  peculiar :  "^T'.'S  IU"'55  T^IQ  heyad 
ish  itti,  by  ike  hand  of  a  man  timely, 
opportune,  seasonable.  The  proper 
Greek  rendering,  as  Bochart  remarks,  is 
Katptcj,  or  tuATtupa),  well-timed  ;  and  the 
evangelist,  in  his  account  of  Pilate's 
time-serving  agency  in  the  events  of  the 
crucifixion,  presents  us  with  the  very 
man  for  the  nonce,  who  is  so  significant- 
ly designated  by  the  epithet  before  us. 
Matt.  27.  20-26  :  '  But  the  chief  priests 
and  elders  persuaded  the  multitude  that 
they  should  ask  Barabbas  and  destroy 
Jesus.  The  governor  answered  and 
said  unto  them.  Whether  of  the  twain 
will  ye  that  I  release  unto  you  ?  They 
said,  Barabbas.  Pilate  saiih  unto  them, 
What  shall  I  do  then  with  Jesus,  which 
is  called  Christ?  They  all  say  unto 
him,  Let  him  be  crucified.  And  the 
governor  said,  Why  ?  what  evil  hath  he 
done  ?  But  they  cried  out  the  more, 
saying.  Let  him  be  crucified.  V/hen 
Pilate  saw  that  he  could  prevail  nothing, 
but  that  rather  a  tumult  was  made,  he 
took  water,  and  washed  his  hands  be- 
fore the  multitude,  saying,  I  am  inno- 
cent of  the  blood  of  this  just  person  ; 
see  ye  to  it.  Then  answered  all  the 
people,  and  said.  His  blood  be  on  us, 
and  our  children.  Then  released  he 
Barabbas  unto  them  :  and  when  he  had 
scourged  Jesus,  he  delivered  him  to  be 
crucified.' 

We  here  leave  the  subject,  commend- 
ed to  the  calm  consideration  of  our 
readers,  to  whom  we  say,  in  the  lan- 
guage of  Spencer,  proposing  his  views 
of  the  same  subject, — '  Si  quis  lumine 
j  perspicaciore  donatus,  hujus  in-stitutl 
rationes  solidiores  assignaverit,  me 
minime  periinacem  experietur  ;'  If  any 
one   possessed  of  clearer  discernment 


158 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


9  And  Aaron  shall  brin^  the  goat 
upon  which  the  Lord's  lot  fell,  and 
oFier  him  for  a  sin-offering. 

10  But  the  goat  on  which  the  lot 
fell  to  be  ihe  scape-goat,  shall  be 
presented  alive  before  the  Lord, 
to  make  ^an  atonement  with  him, 
a7id  to  let  him  go  for  a  scape-goat 
into  the  wilderness. 

11  And  Aaron  shall  bring  the 
bullock  of  the  sin-offering,  which 
is  for  himself,  and  shall  make  an 
atonement  for  himself,  and  for  his 
house,  and  shall  kill   the  bullock 

k  1  John  2.   2. 

shall  assign  better  reasons  for  this  ordi- 
nance, he  IV ill  find  vie  far  from  being 
ohstinalziiiadheringto  my  own  solution. 

The  Sin-offering  for  Aaron  himself. 

11.  And  Aaron  shall  bring  the  bul- 
lock, &c.  Upon  comparing  this  verse 
with  V.  6  above,  it  is  quite  evident  that 
the  term  '  offer'  there  implies  no  more 
than  bringing  the  bullock  to  be  offered^ 
and  not  the  actual  oblation,  whicli  di(i 
not  take  phice   till  after  the  lots  were 

cast  upon  the  goats. ^  For  his  house. 

Tliat  is,  says  Sol.  Jarchi,  '  for  his  breth- 
ren the  priests  ;  for  they  all  are  called 
his  liouse,  as  it  is  written,  Ps.  135.  19, 
*  O  house  of  Aaron,  bless  ye  llie  Lord.' 
And  all  their  atonement  was  not,  save 
for  the  uncleanness  of  the  sanctuary, 
and  the  holy  things  thereof.' 

12.  And  he  shall  take  a  censer  full  of 
burning  coals  from  off  the  altar,  &c. 
This  censer  or  fire-pan  is  called  in  the 
Gr.  of  the  lxx.  TTvpeiov,  fire-vessel,  but 
in  the  New  Testament  this  term  never 
occurs  ;  instead  of  it  we  have  Xi/Jufwroj, 
incense-vessel  or  censer,  as  Rev.  8.  3,5, 
where  mention  is  made  of  a  *  golden 
censer,'  And  it  is  worthy  of  remark 
that  the  Hebrew  writers  say,  'Every 
(other)  day,  he  whose  duty  it  is  to  use 
the  censer,  putteth  coals  on  a  censer  of 
silver,  &c  ,  but  on  this  day  the  high 
priest  putteth  coals  on  a  censer  of  gold.' 


of  the   sin-offering   which    is   for 
himself: 

12  And  he  shall  take  la  censer 
full  of  burning  coals  of  fire  from 
off  the  altar  before  the  Lord,  and 
his  hands  full  of  m  sweet  incense 
beaten  small,  and  bring  it  within 
the  vail  : 

13  n  And  he  shall  put  the  incense 
upon  the  fire  before  the  Loep,  that 
the  cloud  of  the  incense  may  cover 
the  o  mercy-seat  that  is  upon  the 
testimony,  that  he  die  not. 

1  ch.  10.  1.  Numb.  16.  18,  46.  Rev.  8.  5. 
m  Exod.30.  34  n  Exod.  30.  1,  T,  S.  Nuir.b. 
16.  7,    LS  46.      Rev.  8,  3,  4.     o  Exod.  -25.  21. 


This  service  of  burning  incense,  it  will 
be  noticed,  comes  in  between  the  slay- 
ing of  the  bullock  and  the  sprinkling 
of  the  blood  in  the  holj' of  holies.  Tlie 
way  into  the  inner  sanctuary  was  to  be 
prepared  as  it  were,  and  the  Most  High 
made  still  more  placable,  by  this  pre- 
liminary act  of  raising  a  cloud  of  in- 
cense about  the  mercy-seat.  That  it 
liad  a  typical  purport  there  can  be  little 
doubt.  Ciirist,  before  he  entered  with 
his  own  blood  into  heaven,  the  true 
h(tly  of  holies,  prepared  and  sanctified 
himself  and  his  entrance  lliiilier  by  his 
earnest  prayer  as  recorded  John  17,  the 
whole  of  which  chapter  viewed  in  this 
connexion  seems  to  resolve  itself  into  a 
fragrant  cloud  of  incense  coming  up  be- 
fore the  Father's  throne  prior  to  the 
effusion  of  liis  blood  in  its  atoning  effi- 
cacy. That  this  incense-offering  was 
symbolical  of  prayer  will  be  obvious 
upon  reference  to  Rev.  8.  3,  4,  '  And 
another  angel  came  and  stood  at  the 
altar,  having  a  golden  censer  ;  and  there 
was  given  unto  him  nmch  incense,  that 
he  should  offer  it  v;ith  the  prayers  of 
all  saints  upon  the  golden  allar  which 
was  before  the  llirone.  And  the  smoke 
of  the  incense,  which  came  witii  the 
prayers  of  the  saints,  ascended  up  be- 
fore God,  out  of  the  angel's  hand.'  See 
Note  on  Ex.  SO.  3. 

13.  Tke  ni-crcy-seat  that  is  vpon  the 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


159 


14  And  p  he  shall  take  of  the  blood 
of  the  bullock,  and  q  sprinkle  it 
with  his  finger  upon  the  mercy- 
seat  eastward  :  and  before  the 
mercy-seat  shall  he  sprinkle  of  the 
blood  with  his  finsrer  seven  times. 

15  H  r  Then  shall  he  kill  the  goat 
of  the  sin-offering  that  is  for  the 
people,  and  bring  his  blood  «  within 
the  vail,  and  do  with  that  blood  as 

Pch.  4.  5.  Heb.  9.  13,  25,  and  10.  4.  q  ch. 
4.  G.  r  Heb.  2.  17,  and  5.  -J,  and  9.  7,  23. 
s  rer.  2.     Heb.  6.  19,  and  9.  3,  7,  1-2. 

testimony.  That  is,  upon  or  over  the 
tables  of  the  law  which  were  in  the  ark, 
often  called  the  testimony. 

14.  And  he  shall  take  ofthehlood^  &c. 
It  is  to  be  understood  that  he  had  in  the 
mean  time  come  out  of  the  most  holy 
place,  and  now  taking  the  blood,  he  re- 
turned thither,  and  sprinkled  it,  as  the 
Jews  maintain,  not  so  properly  upon  as 
totcards  the  arU  ;  for  it  is  thus  that  they 
understand  the  original  "^^S  ^5>  al  pent, 
ovei'  as:ainst  or  totcards.  The  Gr.  how- 
ever has  s^i  TO  'iXaarnphfj  upon  the 
mercy-seat  ;  and  in  v.  15  it  is  clear  that 
this  must  be  the  sense. 

The  Sin-offering  commanded  for  the 
People. 

51.  Then  shall  he  kill  the  goat  of  the 
siJi-offering,  &c.  After  he  had  sprin- 
kled the  bullock's  blood  for  himself,  he 
left  it,  says  IVlaimonides,  in  the  temple, 
upon  a  vase  of  gold  that  was  there,  and 
afterwards  went  out  of  the  temple  and 
killed  the  goat  for  the  people.  The 
blood  of  this  victim  he  dealt  with  as 
with  that  of  the  bullock,  as  described 
in  the  preceding  verse. 

16.  And  he  shall  make  an  atonement 
for  the  holy  place,  &c.  That  is,  by  the 
ceremonies  foregoing,  which  he  has 
just  described.  It  was  not  a  separate 
J3roceeding  by  which  this  expiation  was 
made.  But  the  ordinance  itself  is  a 
most  striking  commentary  upon  the 
innate  and  actual  depravity  of  fallen 
man.    Though  the  high  priest  alone  en- 


he  did  with  the  blood  of  the  bul- 
lock, and  sprinkle  it  upon  the 
mercy-seat,  and  before  the  mercy- 
seat  : 

16  And  he  shall  t  make  an  atone- 
ment for  the  holy  place,  because  of 
the  uncleanness  of  the  children  of 
Israel,  and  because  of  iheir  trans- 
gressions in  all  their  sins;  and  so 
shall  he  do  for  the  tabernacle  of 
the  congregation    that  remaineth 


t  See  Exod.  29. 
9.  2-2,  23. 


Ezek.  45.  13.     Heb. 


lered  into  the  holy  of  holies,  yet  it 
thereby  became  defiled,  and  must  be 
purified  from  the  uncleanness  contracted 
by  its  contact  with  his  person,  even 
while  engaged  in  the  most  sacred  du- 
ties. So  also  with  ihe  tabernacle  and 
the  altar.  The  defiling  power  of  the 
collective  iniquities  of  the  people  sub- 
jected those  structures  also  to  the  ne- 
cessity   of    a     similar    purgation. 

V  The  tabernacle  of  the  congregation 
that  remaineth  among  them  in  the  midst 
of  their  uncleanness.  Heb.  "pTirn  hash- 
shaken,  that  ahidelh.  The  root  cf  the 
original  word  is  "p'J  shakan,  from 
which  comes  shekinah,  and  it  would 
scarcely  be  out  of  the  way  to  render  it 
here, — '  that  shekinizeth  among  them.' 
The  Gr.  however  has  exriafui'ri,  builded, 
constructed,  formed  ;  and  to  this  word 
the  apostle  doubtless  had  reference  in 
Heb.  9.  11, '  through  a  greater  and  more 
perfect  tabernacle,  not  made  with  hands, 
that  is,  not  of  this  building  (nv  ravrm 
rrii  KTto-cwc).'  '  The  temple  of  his  body 
and  the  veil  of  his  flesh,  John  2.  21, 
Heb.  10.20,  were  by  imputation  of  our 
sins  made  as  unclean,  and  sprinkled 
with  his  own  precious  blood,  that  he 
might  reconcile  us  to  God.  Heb.  23. 
It  was  necessary  that  (Moses'  taber- 
nacle and  Solomon's  temple)  the  pat- 
terns ol  things  in  the  heavens  should  be 
purified  with  these  (the  sacrifices  before 
mentioned),  but  the  heavenly  things 
themselves  with  better  sacrifices  than 
these,' — Ainswortk. 


160 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


among  them  in  the  midst  of  their 
uncleanness. 

17  u  And  there  shall  be  no  man 
in  the  tabernacle  of  the  congrega- 
tion when  he  goelh  in  to  make  an 
atonement  in  the  holy  place,  until 
he  come  out,  and  have  made  an 
atonement  for  himself,  and  for  his 
household,  and  for  all  the  congre- 
gation of  Israel. 

18  And  he  shall  go  out  unto  the 
altar  that  is  before  the  Lord,  and 
2^  make  an  atonement  for  it;  and 
shall  take  of  the  blood  of  the  bul- 
lock, and  of  the  blood  of  the  goat, 
and  put  it  upon  the  horns  of  the 
ahar  round  about. 

u  See  ExoJ.  34.  3.  Luke  1.  10.  *  Exod. 
30.10.    ch.  4.  7,  13.    Heb.9.  22,  23. 


17.  And  there  shall  he  no  man  in  the 
tabernacle,  &c.  None  either  of  the 
people,  or  the  priests  who  might  ordi- 
narily be  in  attendance  upon  llie  servi- 
ces of  the  tabernacle.  Throughout  this 
most  important  part  of  the  ceremony 
the  high  priest  officiated  alone.  In 
this  fact  the  typical  character  of  his 
sacred  functions  appears  very  conspic- 
uous. The  whole  work  of  atonement 
for  our  sins  was  performed  by  Christ 
alone.  No  one  aided  him  ;  no  one  par- 
ticipated with  him  ;  he  bore  all  our 
sufferings  ;  to  him  all  the  glory  is  due. 
He  trod  the  wine-press  alone,  and  of 
the  people  there  was  none  with  him. 
His  own  arm  brought  salvation.  '  By 
himself  he  purged  our  sins.'  '  His  own 
S".!/  bare  our  sins  in  his  own  body  on 
the  tree.' 

18.  Shall  go  out  unto  the  alta^  that  is 
before  the  Lord.  The  words  before 
the  Lord'  would  seem  to  indicate  that 
the  golden  altar  of  incense  in  the  lioly 
place  is  intended  ;  and  so  it  is  generally 
understood  by  the  Jewish  and  Christian 
commentators.  In  this  case,  the  *  com- 
ing out'  mentioned  v.  17,  must  be  re- 
ferred to  his  coming  out  of  the  holy  of 
holies  into  the  outer  room,  where  the 
altar  of  incense  stood.    Patrick,  how- 


19  And  he  shall  sprinkle  of  the 
blood  upon  it  with  his  finger  seven 
times,  and  cleanse  it,  and  y  hallow 
it  from  the  uncleanness  of  the 
children  of  Israel. 

20  *[[  And  when  he  hath  made  an 
end  of  2  reconciling  the  holy  place, 
and  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation, and  the  altar,  he  shall  bring 
the  live  goat: 

21  And  Aaron  shall  lay  both  his 
hands  upon  the  head  of  the  live 
goat,  and  confess  over  him  all  the 
iniquities  of  the  children  of  Israel, 
and  all  their  transgressions  in  all 
their  sins,  a  putting  them  upon  the 


y  Ezek.  43.  20.     z  ver.   16.     Ezek.  45.  20. 
a  Isai.  63.  G. 


ever,  contends  that  the  altar  of  sacrifice 
is  meant  which  stood  in  the  outer  court, 
and  that  the  high  priest's  '  coming  out,' 
V.  17,  and  his  'going  out,'  v.  18,  was 
his  coming  out  from  the  tabernacle. 
There  is  some  reason  to  think  this  the 
correct  interpretation,  as  otherwise  we 
have  no  account  whatever  of  tlie  outer 
altar's  being  cleansed.     The  inference, 

however,  is  still  uncertain. IT  Shall 

take  of  the  blood  of  the  bullock  and  the 
goat.  The  blood  of  each  animal  was 
to  be  put  into  a  basin,  and  thoroughly 
mingled  together  in  order  to  its  being 
smeared  and  sprinkled  upon  the  altar. 

The  Disposal  of  the  Live  or  Scape-goat. 
20.  And  when  he  hath  made  an  end 
of  reconciling  the  holy  place.  Heb. 
"l5i?2  n^51  vekillah  mikkappi-r,  and 
when  he  hath  finished  atonifig,  or  7nak- 
ing  atonement  for.  In  like  manner  the 
original  word  for  orotic  (at-one)  is  often 
rendered  to  reconcile  ;  and  on  the  oiher 
hand  the  Gr.  KaraX'Sayri,  reconciliation, 
is  rendered  Rom.  5.  11,  by  atonement. 
As  we  have  gone  so  fully  into  the  de- 
tails of  the  ceremony  of  the  dismission 
of  the  scape-goat  in  our  introductory 
remarks,  little  need  be  said  by  way  of 
comment  on  the  remainiDg  particulars. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


161 


head  of  the  goat,  and  shall  send 
him  away  by  the  hand  of  a  fit  man 
into  the  wilderness: 
22  And  the  goat  shall  b  bear  upon 


22.  And  the  goat  shall  bear  upon  him 
all  thine  iniquities  unto  a  land  not  in' 
habited.    Heb.  n^'iU  f*!^  ^^  <^^  ^^^^^ 
gezciah,  unto  a  land    of  separation. 
As  the  Rabbinical  traditions  respecting 
this  ordinance  are  well  condensed  by 
Mr.  Kiito,  we  give  liis  note  from  the 
Pictorial  Bible.     '  The  Rabbins  inform 
us,  thai  after  the  lot  had  been  taken, 
the  high-priest  fastened  a  long  fillet,  or 
narrow  piece  of  scarlet  to  the  head  of 
the  scape-goat  ;  and  that  after  he  had 
confessed  his  own  sins  and  those  of  the 
people  over  his  head,  or  (for  we  are  not 
quite  certain  about  the  point  of  time) 
when  the  goat  was  finally  dismissed, 
this  fillet  changed  color  to  white  if  the 
atonement   was   accepted  by  God,  but 
else  retained  its  natural  color.     It  is  to 
this  that  they  understand  Isaiah  to  al- 
lude   when   he    says  : — '  Though    your 
sins  be  as  scarlet,  they  shall  be  white 
as  snow  ;  though  they  be  red  like  crim- 
son, they  shall  be  as  wool.'  (Isai.  1.18.) 
After   the   confession   hud   been   made 
over  the  head  of  the  scape-goat,  it  was 
committed  to  the  charge  of  some  i)er- 
son  or  persons,  previously  chosen  for 
the  purpose,  and  carried  away  into  the 
wilderness;  where,  as  we  should  under- 
stand, V.  22,  it  was  set  at  liberty  ;  but 
the  Rabbins  give  a  somewhat  different 
account.     They  inform  us,  (speaking 
with  a  particular  reference  to  Jerusa- 
lem and  the  Temple  service),  that  the 
goat  was  taken  to  a  place  about  twelve 
miles  from  Jerusalem  where  there  was 
a  formidable  rocky  j)recipice  ;  and  they 
add,  that  for  this  occasion  a  sort  of 
causeway  was  made  between  Jerusalem 
and  this  place,  and  that  ten  tents  with 
relays  were  stationed  at  equal  distances 
between  them.     On  arriving  at  the  pre- 
cipice the  goat  was  thrown  down  from 
its  summit,  and  by  knocking  against 
14* 


him  all  their  iniquities  unto  a  land 
not  inhabited  :  and  he  shall  let  go 
the  goat  in  the  wilderness. 

b  Isai.  53.  11, 12.     John  1.  '29.    Heb.  9.  28. 
1  Pet.  2.  -2^. 


the  projections,  was  generally  dashed 
to  pieces  before  it  had  half  reached  the 
bottom.  It  is  added  that  the  result  of 
this  execution  was  promptly  communi- 
cated, by  signals,  raised  at  proper  dis- 
tances, to  the  people  who  were  anxiously 
awaiting  the  event  at  the  Temple.  It 
is  also  said,  that  at  the  same  time  a 
scarlet  ribbon,  fastened  at  the  entrance 
of  the  Temple,  turned  red  at  this  instant 
of  time,  in  token  of  the  divine  accept- 
ance of  the  expiation  ;  and  that  this 
miracle  ceased  forty  years  before  the 
destruction  of  the  second  Temple.  We 
do  not  very  well  understand  whether 
this  fillet  is  a  variation  of  the  account 
which  places  one  on  the  head  of  the 
goat,  or  whether  there  were  two  fillets, 
one  for  the  goat  and  the  other  for  the 
Temple.  If  the  latter,  we  may  conclude 
that  the  change  took  place  simultane- 
ously in  both.  However  understood,  it 
is  very  remarkable  that  the  Rabbins, 
who  give  this  account  of  the  fillets,  as- 
sign the  cessation  of  the  miracle  by 
which  the  divine  acceptance  of  this  ex- 
piation was  notified,  to  a  period  pre- 
cisely  corresponding  with  the  death  of 
Christ — an  event  which  most  Christians 
'  understand  to  have  been  prefigured  by 
atoning  sacrifices,  which  they  believe 
to  have  been  done  away  by  that  final 
consummation  of  all  sacrificial  institu- 
tions. The  assertion  of  the  Apostle, 
that  without  tlie  shedding  of  blood  there 
is  no  remission  of  sin  (Heb.  9.  22),  ren- 
ders the  account  of  the  Rabbins  that  the 
goat  was  finally  immolated,  rather  than 
left  free  in  the  wilderness,  far  from  im- 
probable, were  it  not  discountenanced 
by  verse  22.  It  is  however  possible 
that  the  Jews  may  have  adopted  the 
usage  described  when  they  settled  in 
Canaan,  and  could  not  so  conveniently 
as  in  the  wilderness  carry  the  goat  to 


162 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


23  And  Aaron  shall  come  into  the  I  24  And  he  shall  wash  his  flesh 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation,  j  with  water  in  the  holy  place,  and 
oand  shall  put  off  the  linen  gar- j  put  on  his  garments,  and  come 
ments  which  he  put  on  when  he  ibrlh,  d  and  ofler  his  burnt-offering, 
went  into  the  holy  place,  and  shall    and  the   burnt-offering  of  the  peo- 


leave  them  there 

c  Ezek.  42.  14,  and  44.  19. 

*  a  land  not  inhabited.'  But  they  allow 
that  it  sometimes  escaped  alive  inio  the 
desert,  and  was  usually  taken  and  eaten 
by  the  Arabs,  who,  of  course,  were  liille 
aware  of  what  lliey  did.  See  Calmet, 
Arts. '  Azazel,'  and  '  Expiation  ;'  '  Jen- 
nings' *  Jewish  Antiquities/  &c.' 

The  Change  of  Vestments  and  the  Sub- 
sequent Offering. 
23.  And  Aaron  shall  come  into  the 
tabernacle  of  the  congregation,  and 
shall  put  off  the  linen  garmenls,  &c. 
The  ceremonies  that  followed  the  dis- 
mission ol'ilte  goat  into  the  wilderness, 
are  thus  detailed  by  Maimonides : '  After 
he  has  sent  away  the  goal  by  the  liand 
of  him  that  led  him,  he  returns  to  the 
bullock  and  goat  whose  blood  he  had 
sprinkled  within  the  sanctuary,  and 
opens  them  and  takes  out  the  fat,  which 
lie  puts  in  a  vessel,  to  burn  them  upon 
the  altar.  And  he  cuts  the  restoi  iheir 
flesh  into  large  pieces,  but  one  cleaving 
to  another  and  not  parted  asimder  ;  and 
these  he  sends  by  the  hands  of  others 
to  be  Citrried  out  to  the  pi. ice  of  burning 
(without  the  camp,  Lev.  16.27).  When 
the  g'lai  is  come  into  the  wilderness, 
the  high  priest  goes  out  into  the  wo- 
men's court  to  read  the  law.  While  he 
i*  reading,  they  burn  the  bullock  and 
the  goat  in  the  j)lace  of  tlie  ashes  (wiili- 
out  the  city),  therefore  he  that  sees  the 
priest  when  he  reads,  sees  not  the  bul- 
lock and  the  goat  burnt.  When  he 
reads,  all  the  people  stand  before  him  ; 
and  the  minister  of  the  congregation 
takes  up  the  book  of  the  law,  and  gives 
it  to  the  chief  of  the  congregation,  and 
he  to  the  sagan  (or  second  chief  priest), 
and  the  sagan  gives  it  to  the  high  priest, 
who  stands  up  when  he  receives  it,  and 


pie,  and  make  an  atonement  for 
himself,  and  for  the  people. 

d  ver.  3.  5. 


reads  standing  the  l6ih,  and  part  of  ilie 
23(1,  chapters  of  Leviticus,  reading  and 
blessing  God  both  before  and  after. 
After  this,  he  puts  off  his  white  gar- 
ments, and  washes  liimself,  and  puts  on 
his  golden  garments,  and  sanctifies  Ids 
hands  and  his  feet,  and  offers  the  go:tt 
which  is  for  tiie  general  addition  to  this 
day's  service  (Num.  23.  11),  and  offers 
his  own  ram,  and  tlie  people's  ram,  as 
it  is  said,  Lev.  16.24.  He  then  burns 
(on  the  altar)  the  fat  of  the  bullock 
and  of  the  goat,  that  were  burnt  with- 
out the  camp;  and  he  offers  the  daily 
evening  sacrifice  (the  lamb.  Num. 
28.  3),  and  trims  the  lamps  as  on  other 
days.  After  this  he  sanctifies  his  hands 
and  feet,  and  puts  off  the  golden  gar- 
ments, and  puts  on  his  own  common 
garments,  and  goes  to  his  liouse,  whi- 
ther  all  the  people  accompany  him; 
and  he  keeps  a  feast,  for  that  he  is  come 

out  of  the  sanctuary.' — Ainsuorth. 

IT  And  shall  leave  them,  there.  Never 
more  to  be  worn  again,  either  by  him  or 
any  one  else,  as  they  were  required  to 
be  renewed  every  year.  This  is  the 
uniform  tradition  of  the  Jews. 

24.  He  shall  uash  his  flesh  xcith  irater 
&c.  Ileb.  ym  ra'hatz,  usually  render- 
ed wash,  though  sometimes  lathe,  as  in 
vv.  26,  2S.  Uow  much  of  an  ablution  is 
properly  implied  by  the  term,  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  say.  That  it  does  not  indicate 
a  complete  immersion  of  the  body  in 
water,  would  seem  evident  from  the 
fact,  that  we  read  of  no  provision  being 
made  for  such  a  rite,  either  in  the  holy 
place  or  in  the  court  of  the  tabernacle. 
At  the  same  time,  we  cannot  well  doubt 
that  it  signifies  something  more  than 
j  the  mere  washing  of  the  hands  and  feet. 
1  On    the   whole,  the   idea  of  a  copious 


B.  C.  1490.1 


CHAPTER  XVI. 


163 


25  And  e  the  fat  of  the  sin-offer- 
ing shall  he  hum  upon   the  altar. 

26  And  he  that  lei  go  the  goat 
for  the  scape-goat  shall  wash  his 
clothes,  fand  halhe  his  flesh  in 
water,  and  afterward  come  into 
the  camp. 

27  g  And  the  huWock  for  the  sin- 
offering,  and  the  goat  for  the  sin- 
ofiering,  whose  hlood  was  brought 
in  to  make  atonement  in  the  holy 
place,  shdiii  owe  carry  forth  without 

e  ch.  4,  10.  f  ch  15.  5.  6  ch.  4.  U,  21, 
and  G.  30.     Heb.  13.  11. 

affusion  seems  lo  come  nearest  to  the 
geiuiine  import  of  ihe  term. 

25.  And  the  fat  of  the  sin-offering 
shall  he  hvrn  upon  the  altar.  H^b. 
"T^tSp"!  yaktir,  shall  fume  or  burn  as 
incense,  according  to  the  explanation 
given  in  the  Note  on  Lev.  1.  9,  Ex.29.  13. 
The  burning  of  the  fat  upon  the  altar, 
and  the  burning  of  the  body  without  the 
camp,  is  expressed  by  Moses  by  two 
difTerenl  words.  The  altar  upon  which 
the  fat  was  to  be  burnt,  was  of  course 
the  brazen  altar  in  the  court  yard,  for 
upon  the  golden  altar  nothing  of  the 
kind  was  permitted.   Ex.  30.  9. 

26.  And  he  that  let  go  the  goat  for  the 

scape-goat. '  Heb.  ^-^ym  r,5^  n;u;^n 

bTKT2>i  hammeshalliah  eth  hassair  la- 
azazel,  he  that  sent  or  led  away  the 
goat  to  Azazel.  The  reading  of  the 
original  decidedly  confirms  our  previous 
view  of  the  true  purport  of  Azazel.  It 
is  wholly  at  variance  with  the  genius 
of  the  Hebrew  to  express  such  an  idea 
as  '  a  goat  for  a  scape-goat,'  by  such  a 
phraseology  as  we  here  find.  The  force 
of  the  preposition  ^  to,  has  another 
bearing  altogether.  It  denotes  devote- 
ment  to  a  particular  purpose  or  object. 
The  'fit  man  '  who  was  the  agent  in 
this  transaction,  was  considered  as  hav- 
ing  contracted  so  nmch  defilement  by 
the  office  he  performed,  thai  he  was  not 
permitted  to  re-enter  the  camp  without 
having  undergone  a  previous  lustration 
of  his  person. 


the  camp  ;  and  they  shall  burn  in 
the  fire  their  skins,  and  their  flesh, 
and  their  dung. 

28  And  he  that  burneth  them 
shall  wash  his  clothes,  and  balhe 
his  flesh  in  water,  and  afterward 
he  shall  come  into  the  camp. 

29  H  And  this  shall  be  a  statute 
for  ever  unto  you:  LhaL  ^ia  the 
seventh  month,  on  the  tenth  day 
of  the  month,  ye  shall  afflict  your 
souls,  and  do  no  work  at  all,  xvhe- 

h  Exod.  30.  10.  ch.  -23.  27.  Numb.  29.  7. 
Isai.  58.  .S,  5.  Dan.  10.  3,  12. 


27.  Shall  one  carry  forth  without  the 
camp.  For  the  evangelical  import  of 
this  pari  of  the  ceremony,  as  explained 
by  the  apostle,  Heb.  13.  11,  see  Note  on 
Lev.  6.  SO. 

Recapitulation. 
29.  This  shall  be  a  statute  for  ever 
unto  you.  Heb.  tD^IS'  Tpn^  lehuk' 
kath  olcim,  for  a  statute  of  eternity. 
That  is,  through  the  whole  period  of 
that  economy  till  Christ,  the  substance 
of  ihe  Levitical  shadows,  should  come. 
See  Note  on  Ex.  21.  6,  where  this  phra- 
seology is  more  fully  illustrated. 

IT  Ye  shall  afflict  your  souls.  Heb. 
d^'^nrC^    r",l<    1D3>n    taanu  eth   naph- 

Shothikem.       Gr.    ra-civucTarc   Tag  xpv^ai 

vfiuji',  ye  shall  humble  souls.  Our  Eng- 
lish sense  of  the  word  soul  does  not 
come  up  to  the  full  import  either  of  the 
Hebrew  or  Greek.  As  wc  have  already 
shown  in  the  Note  on  Gen.  12.  5,  and 
elsewhere,  the  term  C5D  nephesh  is 
used  as  equivalent  lo  perso7i,  and  there- 
lore  includes  the  body  as  well  as  the 
soul, — and  as  fasting  was  one  of  the 
duties  of  the  day,  il  is  evidently  to  be 
understood  in  that  latitude  here.  Thus 
also  Ps.  35. 13,  '  I  humbled  (Heb.  afflict- 
ed)  my  soul  with  fasting.'  Is.  58.  5, 
'  Is  il  such  a  fast  that  I  have  chosen? 
a  day  for  a  man  to  afflict  his  soul  ?^  In 
the  Hebrew  idiom  an  abstinence  from 
all  corporeal  delights,  and  a  voluntary 
subjecting  ones'  self  to  penances  and 


164 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


therit  be  one  of  your  own  country, 
or  a  stranger  that  sojournelh  among 
you: 

30  For  on  that  day  shall  the  priest 
make  an  atonement  for  you,  to 
i  cleanse  you,  that  ye  may  be  clean 
from  all  your  sins  before  the  Lord. 

31  kit  shall  be  a  sabbath  of  rest 
unto  you,  and  ye  shall  afflict  your 
souls  by  a  statute  for  ever. 

32  1  And  the  priest  whom  he  shall 
anoint,  and  whom  he  shall  m  con- 
secrate to  minister  in  the  priest's 
office  in  his  father's  stead,  shall 
make  the  atonement,  and  "shall 
put  on  the  linen  clothes,  eoen  the 
holy  garments: 

33  And  o  he  shall  make  an  atone- 

i  Ps.  61.  -2.  Jer.  33.  8.  Eph.  5.  26.  Heb. 
9.  13,  14,  and  10.  1,  2.  1  John  1.  7,  9.  k  ch. 
■23.  32.  1  ch.  4  3,  5,  16.  m  Exod.  ::9.  29,  30. 
Numb  20,  26,  28.  »  ver.  4.  o  ver.  6,  16, 
IS,  19,  24. 


mortifications,  is  termed  '  afllicliiig  the 

soul.' TT  Bo  no  u-ork  at  all.     It  being 

in  fact  regarded  as  a  solenin  Sabbath, 
as  we  learn  from  v.  31.  It  was  to  be  a 
day  wholly  devoted  to  religious  ser- 
vices of  the  most  severe  and  engrossing 
character. 

30.  For  on  that  day,  shall  the  priest 
make  an  atonement  for  you.  The  ex- 
pression in  ihe  original  is  impersonal, 
and  consequently  equivalent  to  '  atone- 
ment shall  be  made  for  you.'  The  Gr. 
has  correctly  e^t^aG€Tal  tteoi  vi.hov,  it  shall 
be  atoned  for  you.  So  also  in  like  man- 
ner in  V.  31,  '  the  priest  whom  he  shall 
anoint'  is  but  another  form  of  saying, 
'  the  priest  who  shall  be  anointed,'  as  is 
clearly  intimated  by  the  Gr.  rendering; 
'  whom  they  shall  anoint.' 

34.  For  all  their  sins  once  a  year. 
Many  ex])iatory  ceremonies  have  alrea- 
dy passed  under  our  notice,  as  required 
in  various  circumstances  ;  but  this  was 
the  grand  and  general  expiation  in  vvhicii 
atoning  sacrihces  were  nmde  for  all  the 
sin  and  all  the  defilement  of  the  pre- 
ceding year.  Hence  it  was  pre-emi- 
nently distinguished   as    the    Day  of 


ment  for  the  holy  sanctuary,  and 
he  shall  make  an  atonement  for 
the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation, 
and  for  the  altar:  and  he  shall 
make  an  atonement  for  the  priests, 
and  for  all  the  people  of  the  con- 
gregation. 

34  pAnd  this  shall  be  an  ever- 
lasting statute  unto  you,  to  make 
an  atonement  for  the  children  of 
Israel  for  all  their  sins  q  once  a 
year.  And  he  did  as  the  Lord 
commanded  Moses. 

CHAPTER  XVII. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2  Speak  unto  Aaron,  and  unto  his 
sons,  and  unto  all  the  children  of 
Israel,  and  say  unto  them.  This  is 

P  cb.  23.  31.  Numb.  29.  7.  q  Exod.  30. 
10.    Heb.  9.  7,  25. 


Atonement.  The  idea  of  the  institution 
seems  to  have  been,  that  inasmuch  as 
the  incidental  and  occasional  sin-offer- 
ings had,  from  their  very  nature,  left 
much  sin  for  which  no  expiation  had 
been  made,  there  should  be  a  day  in 
which  all  omissions  of  this  sort  should 
be  supplied,  by  one  general  expiation, 
so  that  at  the  end  of  the  year  no  sin  or 
pollution  might  remain  for  which  ihe 
blood  of  atonement  had  not  been  shed. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 
The  preceding  ordinances  relative  to 
the  ministration  of  the  High  Priest  in 
the  Holy  of  Holies,  are  here  followed 
by  others  of  a  miscellaneous  nature, 
having  respect  to  the  whole  nation  in 
the  matter  of  sacrificial  offering,  and 
therefore  addressed  to  them  conjointly 
with  Aaron  and  his  sons. 

Precept  in  regard  to  the  killing  of 
Cattle. 
1,  2.  Speak  unto  Aaron,  and  unto  his 
sons.  That  is,  unto  the  priests  ;  who 
were  called  '  the  sons  of  Aaron,'  by  a 
usage  of  perpetual  occurrence.    As  they 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVII. 


les 


the  thing  which  the  Lord  hath 
commanded,  saying, 
3  What  man  soever  there  be  of 
ihe  house  of  Israel,  a  that  killeth 

a  See  Deut.  12.  5,  15,  21. 

jvere  the  appointed  sacrificers  for  the 
people,  the  precepts  before  us  were  to 
ie  first  addressed  to  them,  and  then 
.hrough  them  to  the  whole  collective 
people. 

3.  What  man  soever  there  be  of  the 
\ousc  of  Israel.  Heb.  TPn;^  :n-«c«  'O'i^ 
bi^Ti"^  ish  ish  mibbaith  Yisracl,  man, 
man,  of  the  house  of  Israd  ;  to  which 
'.he  Gr.  adds,  '  or  of  the  proselytes  that 
»re  adjoined  unto  you  ;'  which  is  vir- 
nially  warranted   by  the  language    of 

Moses  in  v.  8. IT  That  killeth  an  ox. 

Heb.  'CnD'^  yish'hat,  a  word  properly 
signifying  to  slaughter  in  general,  and 
not  peculiarly  limited  to  the  slaying  of 
aninials  by  way  of  sacrifice,  although 
very  frequently  employed  in  that  sense. 
At  the  same  time,  considerable  doubt 
hangs  over  its  genuine  import  in  this 
connexion.  Commentators  are  by  no 
means  agreed  as  to  the  true-meant  de- 
sign of  the  precept.  Michaelis,  Rosen- 
muller,  and  others  contend  that  the 
point  of  the  enactment  is,  that  the 
Israelites  sliould  bring  the  animals  they 
intended  to  kiW  for  food  to  the  taberna- 
cle, to  be  dealt  wiih  -.^s  peace-offerings, 
the  blood  being  applied  and  the  fat  con- 
sumed as  in  such  sacrifices,  the  rest 
being  eaten  by  the  ufferer,  as  in  the 
regular  sacrifices  of  this  class.  In 
proof  of  this,  Michaelis  insists  on  the 
import  of  the  original  word  tSHD  sha- 
^hat,  to  kill  in  general,  and  its  distinc- 
tion from  KDV  zaba^h,  to  kill  for  sacri- 
fice. But  the  use  of  these  terms  by  the 
sacred  writers  is  too  indiscriminate  to 
allow  of  any  definite  conclusion  being 
built  upon  it.  Still  it  is  possible  that 
what  Michaelis  affirms  may  be  the  gen- 
uine import  of  the  passage,  and  the 
additional  reason  that  he  suggests  for  it 
is  not  without  considerable  weight,  viz, 
the  prevention  of  secret  sacrifices   to 


an  ox,  or  lamb,  or  goat  m  tne  camp, 
or  that  killeth  tt  out  of  the  camp, 
4  b  And  bringeth  it  not  unto  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
fa  Deut.  12.  5,  6, 13,  14. 


idols.  '  Considering  the  propensity  to 
idolatry  which  the  people  brought  with 
ihem  from  Egypt,  it  was  necessary  to 
take  care  lest,  when  any  one  killed 
such  animals  as  were  usual  for  sacri- 
fices, he  should  be  guilty  of  supersli- 
tiously  offering  them  to  an  idol.  This 
precaution  was  the  more  reasonable, 
because,  in  ancient  times,  it  was  so 
very  coumon  to  make  an  offering  of  the 
flesh  which  a  person  intended  to  eat, 
and  because  the  Israelites  could  but 
rarely  enjoy  that  sort  of  food  in  the 
wilderness.  And  hence  arose  a  sus- 
picion  not  very  unreasonable,  that  who- 
ever killed  animals  usually  devoted  to 
the  altar,  ofiered  them  of  course  ;  and 
therefort  Moses  enjoined  the  Israelites 
not  to  kill  such  animals  otherwise  than 
in  public,  and  to  offer  them  all  to  the 
true  God,  that  so  it  might  be  out  of  their 
power  to  make  them  offerings  to  idols, 
by  slaughtering  them  privately,  and 
under  the  pretence  of  using  them  for 
food.' 

But  to  this  view  of  the  subject  there 
are  two  objections,  apparently  formida. 
ble,  which  Michaelis  feels  himself 
called  upon  to  answer.  (1.)  It  is  asked 
whether  it  be  credible  that  God  would 
have  imposed  such  a  hardship  upon  his 
people  as  not  to  concede  to  them  the 
use  of  animal  food,  unless  it  were  first 
presented  before  the  tabernacle,  and 
then  virtually  converted  into  a  religious 
offering?  (2.)  How  is  the  precept, 
when  thus  viewed,  to  be  reconciled  with 
Deut.  12.  13-15,  where,  after  command- 
ing that  all  the  burnt-oflferings  should 
be  offered  in  one  place,  it  is  added, 
<  Notwithstanding,  thou  mayest  kill  and 
eat  flesh  in  all  thy  gates,  whatsoever 
thy  soul  lusteth  after,  according  to  the 
blessing  of  the  Lord  thy  God  which  he 
hath  given  thee  :  the  unclean  and  the 


166 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


gresration,  to  offer  an  offering  unto 
the  Loud  before  the  tabernacle  of 
the  Lord:  blood  shall  be  c  imputed 

c  Rom.  5.  13. 

clean  may  eat  ihereof,  as  of  the  roe- 
buck, and  as  of  the  hart.' 

To  tlie  first  of  these  objections  our 
author  replies,  that  the  Israelites,  like 
most  of  the  modern  Orientals,  particu- 
hirly  the  nomade  tribes,  were  but  liltle 
addicted  to  the  use  of  flesli-meat  ;  that 
tliey  seldom  killed  beasts  but  for  sacri- 
fice ;  and  that  among  them  seasons  of 
sacrifice  were  for  the  most  part  the  only 
seasons  of  feasting,  so  that  what  was 
enjoined  by  iliis  law,  was  what  would 
ordinarily  be  done,  whether  the  animals 
were  formally  oflTered  ornot.  This  then 
would  have  been  no  particular  hardship. 
Nor  must  we  forget  that  while  the  Is- 
raelites continued  in  the  wilderness, 
and  without  any  appropriated  lands, 
they  could  but  very  seldom  have  in- 
dulged in  a  flesh  diet,  without  being  in 
danger  of  extirpating  their  herds.  In- 
deed, properly  speaking,  only  tl>e  two 
tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad,  with  the  half 
tribe  of  Manasseh,  had  herds  (Num. 
32)  ;  the  other  tribes  being  in  general 
but  poorly  provided  in  this  respect.  In 
these  circumstances,  the  Israelites  could 
easily  bear  a  law  which  contributed  to 
the  preservation  and  increase  of  their 
herds ;  especially  when  ve  consider 
that  during  their  sojourn  in  the  wilder- 
ness, their  cattle  could  not  be  multiplied 
as  when  they  had  ceased  to  be  a  nomade 
people. 

As  to  the  second  objection,  founded 
upon  the  grant  so  expressly  recorded 
Deut.  ]2.  13-15,  his  solution  is  equally 
plausible.  He  lliinks  the  law  contained 
in  the  chapter  before  us  was  only  in- 
tended to  operate  temporarily  during 
the  wandering  in  the  wilderness,  and 
that  the  law  in  Deuteronomy,  delivered 
just  before  the  entrance  ol' the  Hebrews 
into  Canaan,  was  intended  expressly  to 
repeal  that  now  under  consideration. 
Indeed  the  language   of   that   second 


unto  that  man,  he  hath  shed  blood  j 
and  that  man  d  shall  be  cut  off 
from  among  his  people : 

d  Gen.  17.  14. 


Statute  would  seem  decidedly  to  favor 
this  construction,  for  the  amount  of  it 
is  (v.  8,  9),  that  they  were  not  to  do  in 
Palestine  every  thing  which  they  were 
then  in  the  practice  of  doing  in  the 
desert,  every  one  at  his  pleasure,  not 
being  yet  come  to  their  permanent  in- 
heritance. It  is  contended,  accordingly, 
that  the  reasons  for  the  repeal  are 
nearly  as  obvious  as  those  for  the  origi- 
nal law.  A  new  and  more  instructed 
generation  would  have  arisen  than  that 
which  had  been  so  deeply  imbued  with 
the  idolatries  of  Egypt,  and  tiie  occa- 
sion for  the  restriction  would  therefore 
not  have  been  strong.  And  besides,  the 
observance  ol'  the  original  law  would 
have  been  scarcely  practicable  when 
the  Hebrews  became  settled  in  Pales- 
tine. They  would  naturally  then  be 
disposed  to  consume  more  animal  food, 
as  settled  people  usually  do  even  in  the 
East,  than  when  nomades  ;  and  yet  this 
law  would  nearly  have  operated  as  an 
interdiction  to  a  great  part  of  the  popu- 
lation, who,  residing  at  a  distance  from 
the  tabernacle  or  temple,  would  have 
been  obliged  to  take  a  long  journey  with 
their  oxen,  sheep,  or  goats,  to  offer 
them  at  the  altar  before  they  cotild 
taste  their  meat. 

On  the  whole,  although  Ainsworth, 
Patrick,  and  some  others  understsmd 
this  law  as  having  reference  solely  to 
animals  killed  for  sacrifice,  yet  we  are 
more  inclined  to  adopt  the  view  stated 
above,  which  is  adopted  also  by  Scott 
and  other  expositors  of  high  repute  in 
modern  limes.  For  farilier  remarks 
upon  the  scope  of  the  law  itself,  and 
some  apparent  exceptions,  see  Note  on 
Deut.  12.  13-15. 

4.  Blood  shall  be  imputed  unto  that 
man.  Tliat  is,  that  man  shall  be  ac- 
counted a  murderer.  In  shedding  the 
blood  of  the  animal  he  shall  be  deemed 


K  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVII. 


167 


5  To  the  end  that  the  children 
of  Israel  may  bring  their  sacrifices 
e  which  ihey  offer,  in  the  open  field, 
even  that  they  may  bring  them 
unto  the  Lord,  unto  the  door  of 
the  tabernacle  of  ihe  congregation, 
unto  the  priest,  and  offer  ihem  for 
peace-offerings  uuto  the  Lord. 

0  Gen.  21.  33,  and  22.  2,  and  31.  64.  Dcut. 
1-2.  2.  1  Kings  14.  23.  2  Kings  16.  4,  and  17. 
10.     2  Chron.  23.  4.     Ezek.  20.  28,  and  22.  9. 


to  have  shed  the  blood  of  a  human  being, 
and  guilt  shall  rest  upon  him  accord- 
ingly. So  in  a  ciise  where  a  similar 
profanation  of  a  divine  ordinance,  by 
disregarding  its  spirit,  is  spoken  of,  it 
is  said,  Is.  68.  3,  '  He  that  killeth  an  ox 

is  as  if  he  slew  a  man.' IT  That  man 

shall  be  cut  off.  Heb.  iiinn  IL'^KH  ITH-D 
nikrath  haish  hahu,  which  the  Gr.  ren- 
ders E^uXeOpevOfjaerai  h  ^v^fi  iKeiifrj,  that 
soul  shall  be  destroyed,  where  it  will  be 
observed  that  *  that  soul'  in  the  version 
answers  to  *  tliat  man'  in  the  original. 
On  the  import  of  this  phrase,  see  Note 
on  Gen.  17.  14.  The  intimation  here 
undoubtedly  is,  either  that  the  sentence 
of  death  should  be  passed  upon  the  of- 
fender by  the  magistrate,  or  that  God 
would  directly  interfere  and  cut  him  off 
from  among  the  living,  though  not,  we 
presume,  in  a  miraculous  manner,  but 
by  so  ordering  his  providence,  as  to  en- 
sure that  result.  The  latter  sense  will 
perhaps  appear  the  most  probable  by 
comparing  the  present  with  v.  10,  where 
he  threatens  to  execute  vengeance  with 
his  own  hand  against  him  who  should 
be  guilty  of  '  eating  blood.'  If  the 
punishment  should  seem  severe,  we  are 
to  ren«?»iber  that  the  law  was  intended 
to  be  a  preventative  to  idolatry,  and  the 
penalties  enacted  for  this  crime  were 
necessarily  very  severe,  for  the  reasons 
mentioned  in  the  Introduction  to  the 
Notes  on  the  second  volume  of  Exodus, 
to  which  the  reader  is  referred. 

5.  To  the   end,  &c.    Expressive  of 
the  general  scope  of  the  present  statute,  I 
■which  is  to  call  ihem  off  from  all  prac-  \ 


6  And  the  priest  fshall  sprinkle 
the  blood  upon  the  altar  of  the 
Lord  at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle 
of  the  congregation,  and  g  burn  the 
fat  for  a  sweet  savour  unto  the 
Lord, 

7  And  they  shall  no  more  offer 
their  sacrifices  h  unto  devils,  after 

fch.  3.  2.  S  Exod.  29.  IS.  ch.  3.  5,  11,  16, 
and  4.  31.  Numb.  18.  17.  '>  Deut.  32.  17. 
2  Chron.  11.  15,  Ps.  106.  37,  1  Cor,  10.  20. 
Rev.  9.  20. 


tices  of  an  idolatrous  tendency,  by  re- 
quiring them  to  bring  the  flesh  of  slain 
animals  wliich  they  would  otherwise  be 
in  danger  of  sacrificing  to  demons  in 
the  open  fields,  to  the  precincts  of  the 
tabernacle,  and  there  converting  them 
to  '  peace-ofFerings  to  the  Lord  '  before 
they  were  eaten.  So  if  we  would  have 
our  daily  food  most  signally  blessed  to 
us,  let  us  first  consecrate  it  to  the  boun- 
teous Giver,  and  vow  to  him  all  the 
strength  and  refreshment  that  we  may 

derive  from  the  use  of  it. IT  Which 

they  offer  in  the  open  field.  Heb.  '^T23i5 
mm  "1:5  ):>:>  D^'n^T  en  asher  him  zo- 
be'hini  al  penii  hassadeh,  which  they 
(are)  sacrificing  on  the  face  of  the  field, 
i.  e.  which  they  were  heretofore  in  the 
habit  of  offering,  or  which  they  might 
now  be  inclined  to  offer,  alter  a  heathen 
fashion,  in  the  open  fields  and  high 
places.  The  Jewish  writers  say,  *  Be- 
fore  the  tabernacle  was  set  up,  the  high 
places  were  lawful  ;  and  the  service 
was  by  the  first-born  ;  after  the  taber- 
nacle was  erected,  the  high  places  were 
unlawful,  and  the  service  was  performed 
by  the  priests.'  This  limitation  as  to 
the  place  of  worship  is  graciously  done 
away  under  the  gospel,  Mai.  1,  11, '  My 
name  shall  be  great  among  the  Gentiles, 
and  in  every  place  incense  shall  be  of- 
fered unto  my  name,  and  a  pure  of- 
fering.' 

7.  They  shall  offer  no  more  their  sa- 
orifices  unto  devils.  Heb.  t3">'T^3>mJ) 
lasse'irim,  to  goats  ;  Chal,  Qilia  shadimy 
wasting  or  destroying  creatures;  Gr. 
TiHi   fxaTaiois,    to    vain    thirigs.      Vulg. 


168 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490, 


whom  they  i  have  gone  a  whoring : 
this  shall  be  a  statute  for  ever 
unto  them  throughout  their  gene- 
rations. 

S  *i[  And  thou  shah  say  unto  them, 
Whatsoever  man  there  be  of  the 
house  of  Israel,  or  of  the  strangers 
which  sojourn  among  you,  k  that 
offereth  a  burnt-offering  or  sacrifice, 

9  And  1  bringeth  it  not  unto  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation, to  offer  it  unto  the  Lord  ; 

i  Exod.  34.  15.  ch.  20.  5.  Deut.  31.  16. 
Ezek.  23.  8.     k  ch.  1.  2,  3.     '  ver.  4. 

'  Dsenionibus,'  to  demons.  The  original 
Hebrew  term  here  rendered  '  devils,' 
properly  signifies  hairy  ones,  or  crea- 
tures rough,  rugged,  and  shaggy  in  as- 
pect;  and  hence  is  applied  not  only  to 
he-goats,  but  to  certain  fabulous  beings 
or  sylvan  gods,  who  were  popularly 
supposed  to  appear  in  the  form  of  goats. 
Herodotus  says  that  all  goats  were 
worshipped  in  Egypt,  particularly  the 
he-goat,  and  from  these  sprung  Pan, 
Silenus,  and  the  innumerable  herd  of 
imaginary  beings,  satyrs,  dryads,  fauns, 
&c.  all  woodland  gods,  and  held  in  ven- 
eration  among  the  Egyptians,  Greeks, 
and  Romans.  From  this  source  too  it 
is  not  unlikely  that  the  popular  repre- 
sentations of  the  devil  in  Christian 
countries,  in  which  he  is  represented  as 
having  a  goat-like  form,  with  a  tail, 
horns,  and  cloven  feet,  are  borrowed. 
Such  representations  certainly  bear  a 
strong  resemblance  to  what  was  fan- 
cied of  the  appearance  of  the  ancient 
heathen  Pan,  whose  name,  from  his 
striking  terror  into  the  popular  mind) 
has  given  rise  to  our  English  word 
panic.  The  language  would  seem  evi- 
dently  to  imply  that  the  Israelites  had 
been  formerly,  or  during  their  residence 
in  Egypt,  addicted  to  the  worship  of 

these  fictitious  deities. ^  After  whom 

they  have  gone  a  whoring.  Chal.  *  With 
whom  they  have  erred  or  committed 
idolatry.'  This  term  is  often  employed 
in  the  Scriptures  to  denote  idolatry,  be- 


even  that  man  shall  be  cut  off  from 
among  his  people. 

10  If  m  And  whatsoever  man  ^-^ere 
be  of  the  house  of  Israel,  or  of  the 
strangers  that  sojourn  among  you, 
that  eateth  any  manner  of  blood  ; 
n  I  will  even  set  my  face  against 
that  soul  thai  eateth  blood,  and 
will  cut  him  oft'  from  among  his 
people. 

m  Gen.  9.  4.  ch.  3.  17,  and  7.  26,  27,  and 
19.  26.  Deut.  12.  10,  23,  and  Jo.  23.  1  Sam. 
14.  33.  Ezek.  44.  7.  »  ch.  20.  3,  5,  6,  and 
26.17.    Jer.  44.  11.     Ezek.  14.  S,  and  15.  7. 


cause  that  was  a  violation  of  the  cove- 
nant between  God  and  his  people,  which 
is  repeatedly  denominated  a  marriage 
covenant.  Comp.  Ex.  34.  15,  Deut. 
31.  16,  Judg.  8.  33. 

8,  9.  And  thou  shall  say  unto  them, 
&c.  The  law  enacted  in  these  two 
verses  we  conceive  to  differ  from  the 
foregoing,  by  having  respect  exclusively 
to  beasts  slain  for  sacrifice,  and  not  for 
food.  It  is  an  emphatic  declaration 
of  the  divine  will  as  to  the  place  where 
all  sacrificial  offerings  should  be  made. 
As  God  designed  there  should  be  one 
altar,  one  high-priest,  one  sanctuary, 
and  one  commonwealth  of  Israel,  this 
unity  of  the  nation  and  the  religion 
would  be  destroyed  if  various  altars  and 
priests,  and  various  places  of  offerings, 
were  allowed.  Besides,  a  plurality  of 
priests,  altars,  and  sanctuaries,  would 
very  naturally  lead  to  a  plurality  of 
gods,  and  thus  all  the  evils  of  idolatry 
would  be  gradually  introduced  into  the 
worship  of  the  chosen  people.  The 
statute  before  us,  requiring  all  their 
sacrifices  to  be  presented  at  one  place, 
was  happily  adapted  to  prevent  these 
consequences. 

The  Eating  of  Blood  forbidden. 
10.  That  eateth  any  manner  of  blood. 
This  prohibition  is  met  with  twice 
elsewhere  in  the  Levitical  law.  Lev, 
3.  17, — 7.  26,  besides  its  being  found  in 
the  precepts  of  Noah,  Gen.  9.  4.    It  is 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVII. 


169 


Ho  For  the  life  of  the  flesh  is  in 
the  blood  ;  and  I  have  given  it  to 
you  upon  the  altar,  p  to  make  an 

0  ver.  14.  P  Matt.  26.28.  Mark  14.24. 
Rom.  3,  25,  and  5.  9.    Ephes.  ] .  7.     Col.  1.  14, 

repealed  again  and  again,  and  much 
stress  laid  upon  it  as  a  law  that  has 
more  in  it  than  would  at  first  appear. 
The  reason  here  annexed  to  it  is  con- 
I'idered  below,  in  the  note  on  the  ensu- 
ing verse.  It  is  to  be  remarked,  how- 
tver,  that  the  blood  of  clean  fishes,  of 
Incusls,  and  of  creeping  things,  is  un- 
derstood by  the  Jews  to   be   excepted 

irom  this  prohibition. ^  I  will  even 

set  my  face  against  that  soul,  &c.  Heb. 
"'ID  Tiri3  nuthalti  panai,  I  will  give 
my  face.  Gr.  emaTriGd}  to  npnaMTtop  ^ov. 
Chal. '  I  will  set  mine  anger  against  the 
iiiin.'  The  original  word  for  *  face'  is 
oilen  used  by  the  sacred  writers  for 
•  anger,'  as  may  be  seen  by  the  follow- 
ing passages  :  Gen.  33.  20,  '  I  will  ap- 
pease him'  (Heb.  '  I  will  appease  his 
face^y  Lam.  4. 15, '  The  anger  (Heb. 
face)  of  the  Lord  hath  divided  them.' 
Jer.  3.  12,  *  And  I  will  not  cause  mine 
anger  (Heb.  face)  to  fall  upon  you.' 
1  Pet.  3.  12,  '  The  face  (i.  e.  anger)  of 
liie  Lord  is  against  them  that  do  evil.' 

1  ].  For  the  life  of  the  flesh  is  in  the 
blood.  Heb.  J^^l  Q-ID  ^'^"nn  TTSS  '^S 
lei  nephcsh  habbasdr  baddorji  hi,  for  the 
life  or  soul  of  the  flesh  it  is  in  the  blood. 
Gr.  //  Y"P  '/'"X^  TTiiij/is  capKoi  aijxa  avTov 
cTTiv,  for  the  life  or  soul  of  all  flesh  is 
the  blood  thereof.  This  was  not  per- 
haps intended  to  be  affirmed  as  a  strictly 
physiologica,l  fact,  but  simply  to  ex- 
l)ress  wliat  appears  to  be  the  truth,  and 
what  was  popularly  regarded  as  such. 
The  seat  of  vitality  was  ostensibly  in 
the  blood,  because  if  the  blood  was  shed 
life  became  extinct.  Yet  it  is  not  a 
little  remarkable  that  the  researches  of 
modern  anatomists  and  physiologists 
have  brought  them  in  the  main  to  the 
same  conclusion,  namely,  that  the  blood 
is  actually  possessed  of  a  principle  of 
vitality, _      This,  it  is  said,  is  demon- 

15 


atonement  for  your  souls:  for  q it 
is  the  blood  that  maketh  an  atone- 
ment for  the  soul. 

20.  Heb.  13.  12.  1  Pet.  1,  2.  1  John  1,  7 
Rev.  1.  5.     q  Heb.  9.  22. 


strated  by  the  following  among  other 
facts.  If  blood  be  taken  from  the  arm 
in  the  most  intense  cold  that  the  human 
body  can  suffer,  it  will  raise  the  ther- 
mometer to  the  same  height,  as  blood 
taken  in  the  most  sultry  heat.  Now  it 
is  known  that  living  bodies  alone  have 
the  power  of  resisting  great  degrees  of 
heat  and  cold,  and  of  maintaining  in  al- 
most  every  situation,  while  in  liealth, 
that  temperature  which  we  distinguish 
by  the  name  of  animal  heat.  But  it  is 
by  no  means  necessary  to  insist  on  this 
as  implied  in  the  words  of  our  text. 
The  sacred  scriptures  have  little  to  do 
with  the  absolute  verifies  of  natural  sci- 
ence. These  we  are  to  ascertain  from 
other  sources,  and  establish  by  other 

evidence.     See  Note  on  Gen.  9.  4. 

IT  It  is  the  blood  that  maketh  an  atone- 
ment for  the  soul.  By  transgression  a 
man  forfeits  his  life  to  divine  justice, 
and  he  must  die  did  not  mercy  provide 
him  a  substitute.  The  life  of  a  beast 
is  appointed  and  accepted  by  God  as  a 
substitute  for  the  sinner's  life  ;  but  as 
this  life  is  in  the  blood,  and  as  the  blood 
is  the  grand  principle  o[  vitality,  there- 
fore the  blood  is  to  be  poured  out  upon 
the  altar,  and  thus  the  life  of  the  beast 
becomes  a  substitute  for  the  life  of 
the  man.  But  this  was  a  typical  ordi- 
nance, having  direct  reference  to  the 
atonement  of  Christ.  Christ  not  only 
died  for  sinners,  but  our  redemption  is 
ever  ascribed  to  his  blood  :  for  in  order 
to  make  a  satisfactory  atonement,  he 
not  only  bowed  his  head  upon  the  cross 
and  gave  up  the  ghost,  but  his  side  was 
opened,  the  pericardium  and  the  heart 
evidently  pierced,  that  the  vital  fluid 
might  be  poured  out  from  the  very  seat 
of  life,  and  that  thus  the  blood  which  is 
the  life  should  be  shed  to  make  expia- 
tion for  the  life  of  the  soul.  The  forbid- 


170 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490 


12  Therefore  I  said  unto  the 
children  of  Israel,  No  soul  of  you 
shall  eat  blood,  neither  shall  any 
stranger  that  sojourneth  among 
you  eat  blood. 

13  And  whatsoever  man  there  he 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  or  of  the 
strangers  that  sojourn  among  you, 
which  rhunteth  and  catcheth  any 
benst  or  fowl  that  may  be  eaten  ; 
he  shall  even  spour  out  the  blood 
thereof,  and  ^cover  it  with  dust. 

14  "For  it  is  the  life  of  all  flesh, 

r  ch.  7.  26.  s  Deut.  12.  16,  24,  and  15.  23. 
'Ezek.  24.  7-  u  ygr.  11,  12.  Gen.  9.  4. 
Deut.  12.  23. 

ding  the  ealing  of  blood  therefore  would 
naturally  tend  to  beget  a  devout  and 
reverent  regard  for  that  precious  fluid 
which  was  visibly  represented  in  the 
blood  of  the  victims  slain  upon  the  Jew- 
ish altar. 

12.  Therefore  I  said  unto  the  children 
of  Israel,  &c.  Whatever  other  reasons 
might  previously  have  existed  for  this 
prohibition  (Gen.  9.  4),  yet  this  is  the 
reason  why  it  is  to  be  forbidden  to  the 
children  of  Israel,  and  to  all  that  saw 
fit  to  adjoin  themselves  to  the  holy 
people. 

Additional  Precepts  in  regard  to  Blood 
and  the  Carcasses  of  Beasts. 

13.  And  whatsoever  man  there  be,  &c. 
In  this  and  the  subsequent  verses  the 
law  given  above  respecting  the  use  of 
blood  of  sacrificed  beasts  is  extended  to 
that  of  all  other  creatures  common  for 
food,  whether  wild  or  tame,  but  espe- 
cially such  as  were  taken  in  hunting. 
The  blood  was  to  be  carefully  drained 
from  the  body,  and  decorously  covered 

over  with  earth. IT  He  shall   even 

pour  out  the  blood  thereof  and  cover  it 
with  dust.  Lest  it  should  be  licked  up  by 
any  other  animal,  which  he  would  have 
them  avoid,  either  because  the  taste 
of  blood  might  generate  a  destructive 
thirst  for  it,  or  because  he  would  not 
have  any  thing  so  sacred  as  blood  ex- 
posed to  profanation.     The  covering  of 


the  blood  of  it  is  for  the  life  there- 
of: therefore  I  said  unto  the  child- 
ren of  Israel,  Ye  shall  eat  the  blood 
of  no  manner  of  flesh  ;  for  the  life 
of  all  flesh  is  the  blood  thereof: 
whosoever  eatelh  it  shall  be  cut  off. 
15  sAnd  every  soul  that  eateth 
that  which  died  of  itself,  or  that 
which  was  torn  ivilh  beasts,  [iche- 
Iher  it  he  one  of  your  own  country, 
or  a  stranger)  yhe  shall  both  wash 
his  clothes,  zand  bathe  himself  in 

xExod.  22.  31.  ch.  22.  8.  Deut.  14.21. 
Ezek.  4.  14,  and  44.  31.  )  ch.  11.  2o.  z  en. 
16.   6. 

the  blood  also  conveyed  the  intimation 
that  it  should  not  be  imputed  as  a  mat- 
ter of  guilt  to  the  shedder,  as  appears 
from  the  contrary,  Job  16.  18, '  O  earth, 
cover  not  thou  my  blood,  and  let  my 
cry  have  no  place.'  Ezek.  24.  7,  8, 
*  For  her  blood  is  in  the  midst  of  her ; 
she  sets  it  upon  the  top  of  a  rock  ;  she 
poured  it  not  upon  the  ground,  to  cover 
it  with  dust  ;  that  it  might  cause  fury 
to  come  up  to  take  vengeance  ;  I  have 
set  her  blood  upon  the  top  of  a  rock  that 
it  should  not  be  covered  ;'  where  the 
blood  not  covered,  signifies  a  crying  to 
God  for  vengeance.  The  Jews  regard 
this  as  a  very  weighty  precept,  and 
appoint  that  the  blood  should  be  cover- 
ed with  these  words;  'Blessed  is  he 
that  hath  sanctified  us  by  his  precepts, 
and  commanded  us  to  cover  blood.' 

15.  That  which  died  of  itself ,  or  that 
which  was  torn  with  beasts.  This  is 
still  but  theap'plicationof  the  main  law 
in  regard  to  blood  ;  for  in  both  cases, 
the  blood  was  retained  in  the  body  ; 
hence  the  council  at  Jerusalem  forbade 
things  strangled,  as  well  as  blood ; 
because  in  such  beasts,  the  blood  was 
coagulated  in   the  veins  and  arteries. 

^  He  shall  wash  his  clothes.    In  this 

case  it  is  supposed  that  the  person 
sinned  ignoranily  or  through  inadvert- 
ency, not  of  deliberation  or  set  purpose  ; 
for  any  presumptuous  sin  was  to  be  fol- 
lowed by  exemplary  judgments 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


171 


water,  and   be  unclean  until   the 
even:  then  shall  he  be  clean. 
16  But  if  he  wash  them  not,  nor 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

As  the  chosen  and  covenant  tribes  of 
Israel  were  soon  to  take  up  their  jour- 
ney to  the  land  of  Canaan,  the  inhabit- 
ants of  which  were  to  be  exterminated 
for  their  inullifarious  iniquities  in  the 
sight  of  God,  a  recital  is  here  made  of 
some  of  those  aggravated  Ibrms  of 
wickedness  which  were  rife  among 
them,  and  which  God  had  determined 
signally  to  punish.  This  is  done  not 
only  to  illustrate  the  justice  of  the 
divine  proceedings  in  their  excision, but 
also  with  a  view  to  put  the  peculiar 
people  themselves  on  their  guard  against 
yielding  to  the  contagion  of  their  per- 
nicious example,  and  thus  becoming 
obnoxious  to  the  same  fearful  retrib-a- 
tions  wliich  were  now  about  to  be  visit- 
ed upon  the  Canaanites.  The  particu- 
lar class  of  abominations  more  espe- 
cially pointed  out  in  this  chapter,  and 
to  which  the  brand-mark  of  the  divine 
reprobation  is  so  conspicuously  affixed, 
is  that  of  incestuous  connexions.  Not 
only  had  that  abandoned  race  been 
guilty  of  a  total  apostacy  from  the  wor- 
ship of  the  true  God,  substituting  in  his 
room  the  sun,  and  moon,  and  host  of 
heaven,  and  bowing  down  to  stocks  and 
stones  and  creeping  things,  but  they  had 
mingled  with  their  idolatry  every  vice 
that  could  degrade  human  nature  and 
pollute  society.  In  the  black  catalogue 
of  these,  the  abominations  of  lust  stand 
pre-eminent ;  and  whether  in  the  form 
of  adultery,  fornication,  incest,  sodomy, 
or  bestiality,  they  had  now  risen  to  a 
pitch  of  enormity  which  the  forbearance 
of  heaven  could  tolerate  no  longer,  and 
of  which  a  shuddering  dread  was  to  be 
begotten  in  the  minds  of  the  people  of 
the  covenant.  And  in  order  that  no 
possible  plea  of  ignorance  or  uncer- 
tainty might  be  left  in  their  minds  as  to 


bathe  his  flesh,  then  a  shall  he  bear 
his  iniquity. 

a  ch.  5.  1,  and  7.    13,   and  19.  8.    Numb. 


those  connexions  which  were  lawful 
and  those  which  were  forbidden,  the 
Most  High  proceeds  in  the  present  and 
in  the  20ih  chapter  to  lay  down  a  num- 
ber of  specific  prohibiiions  on  this  sub- 
ject, so  framed,  as  not  only  to  include 
the  extra-nuptial  pollutions,  vvliich  had 
prevailed  among  the  heathen,  but  also 
all  those  incestuous  unions  which  were 
inconsistent  with  the  puriiy  and  sanc- 
tity of  the  marriage  relation.  Both 
classes  of  crimes  we  think  are  in  fact 
included  ;  so  that  it  is  doing  no  violence 
to  the  spirit  of  the  text  to  regard  it  as 
containing  a  system  of  marriage-laws 
by  v.hich  the  peculiar  people  were  ever 
after  to  be  governed. 

As  this  is  the  only  passage  in  the 
compass  of  the  whole  Bible  where  any 
formal  enactments  are  given  on  this 
subject,  this  and  the  connected  chapters 
treating  of  this  theme  have  always  been 
deemed  of  peculiar  importance  in  their 
relations  to  the  question  of  the  lawful 
degrees,  within  which  the  marriage  con- 
nexion n»ay  now  he  formed  by  tiiose  who 
make  the  law  of  God  the  great  standard 
of  moral  duty.  But  it  is  more  especially 
with  reference  to  the  lawfulness  of  mar- 
riage with  a  deceased  wife^s  sister  that 
the  bearings  of  this  chapter  become 
important  to  us  under  the  gospel,  and 
at  the  present  time  ;  as  it  is  well  known 
that  the  occurrence  of  cases  of  that  kind 
has  often  greatly  agitated  the  religious 
communions  to  which  the  parties  be- 
longed, and  even  at  the  present  day,  the 
difficulty  of  effecting  an  entire  unanim- 
ity of  sentiment  among  Christians  ap- 
pears as  great  as  ever.  We  can  scarcely 
expect,  indeed,  within  the  limits  which 
the  nature  of  the  present  work  will 
allow,  to  bring  the  matter  to  a  decisive 
issue,  even  if  we  were  entirely  confi- 
dent on  which  side  the  truth  lay,  which 
we  are  forced  to  acknowledge  we  are 


172 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.'  C.  1490. 


not.  The  just  decision  of  the  question 
necessarily  involves  the  establishment 
of  several  great  preliminary  principles 
of  interpretation,  besides  a  display  of 
the  idiomatic  usages  of  the  Hebrew 
philologically  exhibited,  which  cannot 
well  be  made  satisfactory  in  a  small 
compass.  But  as  the  subject  is  one  on 
which  ihe  truth  is  perhaps  to  be  reached 
only  by  the  gradual  accumulation  of 
evidence,  we  venture  with  others  to 
contribute  our  small  quota  of  sugges- 
tion towards  the  solution  of  a  very  im- 
portant point,  not  of  criticism  only,  but 
also  of  casuistrj'. 

It  will  probably  be  seen  that  our 
leanings  are  to  the  side  of  the  unlaw- 
fulness of  the  connexion  ;  but  recent 
discussions  have  brought  forth  so  strong 
an  array  of  arguments  in  support  of  the 
opposite  theory,  that  it  seems,  on  the 
whole,  no  more  than  is  due  to  the  pre- 
sentation of  evidence  on  both  sides,  that 
we  should  at  present  hold  our  judgment 
in  suspense,  simply  giving  to  the  reader 
a  succinct  but  failhful  view  of  the  prin- 
cipal reasonings  relied  upon  by  the  ad- 
vocates of  each. 

1.  The  Meaning  of  the  Phrase  *  Near 
of  Kin.' 
In  the  general  enunciation  of  the  law, 
V.  6,  it  is  said,  '  None  of  you  shall  ap- 
proach to  any  that  is  near  of  kin  to  him 
to  uncover  their  nakedness.'  The  orig- 
inal phrase  is  ITl'D  "iJi'U  sheer  besdro, 
remainder  of  his  flesh,  whereas  in  other 
cases,  though  not  numerous,  the  term 
employed  to  signify  kindred  is  n"lp 
k'Jrob,  from  «"lp  kdrab,  to  draw  nigh. 
Michaelis'  remarks  on  the  terms  in 
question  (Comment.  L.of  M.  Art.  102), 
are  as  follows: — '  If  the  reader  wishes 
to  know  what  these  words  etymologi- 
cally  signify,  I  shall  here  just  state  to 
him  my  opinion,  but  without  repeating 
the  ground  on  which  it  rests.  Sheer 
means,  (1.)  a  remnant ;  (2.)  the  rem- 
nant of  a  meal  ^  (3.)  a  piece  of  any 
thing  eatable,  such  as  flesh;  (4.)  apiece 
of  any  thing  in  general.     Hence  we 


find  it  subsequently  transferred  lo  rela- 
tionship in  the  Arabic  language ;  in 
which,  though  with  a  slight  orthogra- 
phical variation,  that  nearest  relation 
is  called  Ta'ir  or  Thsciir,  whom  the 
Hebrews  denominate  Goil.  In  this 
way.  Sheer,  even  by  itself,  would  sig- 
nify a  relation.  Basar,  commonly  ren- 
dered flesh,  is  among  the  Hebrews 
equivalent  to  body ;  and  may  thence 
have  been  applied  to  signify  relation- 
ship. Thus,  thou  art  my  flesh,  or  body, 
(Gen.  29.  14),  means  thou  art  my  near 
kinsman.  When  both  words  are  put 
together,  Sheer-basar,  they  may  be  ren- 
dered literally  corporeal  relation,  or  by 
a  half  Hebrew  phrase,  kinsinan  ajter 
the  flesh.  In  their  derivation,  there 
are  no  farther  mysteries  concealed,  nor 
any  thing  that  can  bring  the  point  in 
question  to  a  decision  ;  and  what  mar- 
riages Moses  has  permitted  or  com- 
manded, we  cannot  ascertain  from  Sheer- 
basar,  frequent  and  extensive  as  is  its 
use  in  his  marriage-laws:  but  must  de- 
termine, from  his  own  ordinances,  in 
which  he  distinctly  mentions  what 
fSheer-basar,  that  is,  what  relations,  are 
forbidden  to  marry.'  That  the  ideal  con- 
nexion of  the  term  "li^^;  sheer,  w'nh  flesh 
is  somewhat  close  is  evident  from  the 
following  instances  ;  Ps.  73.  26,  '  My 
flesh  C^^aCiIj  sheer i)  and  my  heart  fail- 
eth.'  Ps.  78. 20,  '  Can  he  give  bread  also  ? 
Can  he  provide  jTfs/i  ("M^i::  sheer)  for  his 
people?  Prov.  5.  11, '  And  thou  mourn 
at  the  last  when  thy  flesh  and  thy  body 
('TI^TIj']  ^T1'2  besdrka  u-she'erika)  are 
consumed,'  where  however  the  original 
for  '  flesh '  is  ^Xl  bdsdr,  and  *15<1L^  sheer 
is  rendered  by  *  body.'  In  a  few  in- 
stances, out  of  the  present  connexion,  it 
is  rendered,  as  here,  by  '  kin '  or  '  kins- 
man,' as  Lev.  21.  2,  '  But  for  his  kin 
that  is  near  unto  him  (DIpH  l*15<r^ 
T^iiit  lish'cro  hakkdrob  c'lauv),  for  his 
mother,' &c.  Num.  27.  11, '  And  if  his 
father  have  no  brethren,  then  ye  shall 
give  his  inheritance  unto  his  kinsman 
that  is  next  to  him  (T^lbii  S^lpH  I^S^c)} 
Ushi'rn  hakkdrob  elauv),  of  his  family,' 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


173 


&c.  The  peculiar  combination  ^i^tU 
T»!33  shetr  basdr,  remainder  of  flesh, 
occurs  only  in  v.  16  of  this  chapter,  and 
Lev.  25.  49,  '  Either  his  uncle  or  his 
uncle's  son  may  redeem  him,  or  any 
that  is  7iigh  of  kin  unto  him  C^ii^TI^JZ 
lliTD  mishshecr  besaro,  any  of  his  re- 
mainder of  flesh).'  The  usage  of  the 
Greek  in  these  cases  is  peculiar.  It 
seems  to  be  founded  on  the  assumption, 
tliiU  the  kindred  here  specified  were  in 
the  habit  of  living  together,  as  the  term 
i>  invariably  some  form  of  oik^io;  do- 
7nest/c,  including  those  of  the  same 
household.  Thus  v.  6,  '  None  of  you 
shall  approach  to  any  that  is  near  of 
kin  to  him.^  Gr.  rrpoi  Travra  oiKCia  (oth. 
cop.  outiai)  (TaoKos  avTov,  to  any  domes- 
tic {relation)  of  his  own  flesh.  V.  12, 
'  Tliou  shall  not  uncover  the  nakedness 
(iC  ihy  father's  sister ;  for  she  is  thy 
father's  near  kinswoman.'  Gr.  oiKcia 
yno  Trarpjg  cov  eari^for  she  is  the  domes- 
tic (relation)  of  thy  father.  So  also 
V.  13,  where  mention  is  made  of  the 
mother's  sister.  And  again,  v.  17, 
'  For  they  are  her  near  kinswomen.'  Gr. 
oiKEtat  yap  aov  etaiv,  for  they  are  thy 
domestic  (relations).'  The  tacit  refer- 
ence .is  probably  to  the  nomade  mode 
of  life,  in  which  the  tents  of  near  rela- 
tives were  pitched  in  the  close  vicinity 
of  each  other,  and  their  inmates  were 
in  habits  of  the  most  unrestrained  inter- 
course. Indeed  Maimonides  lays  it 
down  as  the  general  ground  and  reason 
of  the  following  prohibitions,  that  the 
parties  here  debarred  from  marriage  are 
such  as  were  so  bound  together  in  do- 
mestic intimacy,  that  unless  marriage 
were  strictly  forbidden  between  them, 
a  door  would  have  been  opened  for 
scenes  of  the  grossest  corruption  in  the 
circle  of  families  and  kindred.  This 
fact  in  regard  to  the  different  modes  of 
social  life  prevailing  among  the  ancient 
Hebrews  and  with  us,  is  undoubtedly  to 
be  taken  into  account  in  the  present 
discussion,  and  should  be  set  down  to 
the  advantage  of  those  whomaintaintiiat 
the  present  laws  are  not  binding  upon  us.  ' 
15* 


But  we  return  to  the  import  of  the 
expression  before  us,  '  remainder  of 
flesh.'  The  phraseology  is  somewhat 
peculiar,  as  conveying  the  idea  of 
nearness  of  kin.  The  use  of  it  in  this 
sense  probably  arose  from  the  fact  that 
in  the  original  institution  of  marriage, 
the  parties  were  pronounced  to  be  '  one 
flesh.'  In  this  case,  therefore,  one 
might  be  said  to  be  in  relation  to  the 
other,  the  '  remainder  of  his  or  her 
flesh ;'  and  nothing  could  give  a  more 
impressive  idea  of  the  sacred  nearness 
and  oneness  constituted  between  the 
parties  by  the  marriage  compact.  So  a 
child  born  of  such  a  union  is  a  '  remain- 
der of  flesh  '  in  respect  to  his  parents, 
and  his  parents  to  him.  Thus  too  a 
brother  and  sister,  the  ofispring  of  the 
same  parents,  are  the  '  remainder  of 
flesh'  to  each  other  ;  and  this  sense  of 
the  phrase  is  illustrated  in  the  present 
connrtcion,  vv.  12,  13,  where  the  ex- 
pression '  father's  near  kinswoman,' 
and  '  mother's  near  kinswoman,'  is  in 
the  original  '  father's  remainder,'  and 
'  mother's  remainder;'  (Heb  ^54T  §hetr, 
remainder) .  So  again,  v.  17,  *  They  are 
her  near  A:z7jsu"om€n  (mKIL"s/ietra/i,/ie?- 
remainder).'  It  would  seem,  thereibre, 
that  the  established  version  is  not  only 
true  to  the  sense  of  the  original,  but 
also  that  the  expression  includes  all 
the  prohibited  degrees  which  follow. 
They  were  all  '  remainder  of  flesh'  to 
each  other,  and  no  language  could  con- 
vey  the  idea  of  closer  relationship.  The 
distinction,  therefore,  often  much  in- 
sisted on  in  the  construction  of  this 
law,  between  consanguinity  and  aflinity, 
seems  not  to  be  recognized  at  all  by 
the  Holy  Spirit.  To  the  same  conclu- 
sion we  shall  probably  be  brought  by 
a  correct  view  of  the  intrinsic  nature  of 
the  marriage  relation,  as  instituted  by 
God  himself.  '  By  marriage,'  says 
Blackstone  (Com.  B.  I.  ch.  15,  and  note), 
'  the  husband  and  wife  are  one  person 
in  law.  Upon  this  principle  of  an  union 
of  person  in  husband  and  wife,  depend 
almost  all  the  legal  rights,  duties,  and 


174 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


disabilities  that  either  of  them  acquire 
by  marriage.  The  same  degrees  by 
affinity  are  prohibited.  Affinity  always 
arises  by  the  marriage  of  one  of  the 
parlies  so  related.  As  a  husband  is  re- 
lated by  affinity  to  all  the  consanguinei 
of  his  wife,  and  vice  versa,  the  wife  to 
all  the  husband's  consanguinei ;  for  the 
husband  and  wife  being  considered  one 
llesh,  those  who  are  related  to  the  one 
by  blood  are  related  to  the  other  by 
affinity.  Therefore  a  man,  after  his 
wife's  death,  cannot  marry  her  sister, 
aunt,  or  niece.'  By  pronouncing  the 
parties  that  enter  that  connexion  '  one 
flesh,'  it  would  seem  to  have  been  the 
divine  mtenlion  that  marriage  should 
be  regarded,  in  the  highest  sense  con- 
sistent with  the  distinct  personality  of 
the  married,  as  constituting  a  construc- 
tive unity  of  being  in  man  and  wife.  In 
confirmation  of  this  we  beg  leave  to  in- 
troduce  a  note  from  a  previous  volume 
of  this  series  of  commentaries,  on  the 
words  of  the  historian.  Gen.  39. 10,  rela- 
tive to  the  solicitations  of  Polipher's 
wife  to  Joseph  ;  '  And  it  came  to  pass, 
as  she  spake  to  Joseph  day  by  day,  that 
he  hearkened  not  unto  her,  to  lie  by  her, 
or  to  be  with  her.'  *  This  passage 
affords  an  instance  of  a  very  important 
shade  oi' meaning  being  lost  to  the  Eng- 
lish reader  by  the  translators'  not  hav- 
ing adverted  to,  perhaps  not  being  ac- 
quainted with,  the  genuine  force  of  the 
original.  When  we  read  that  Joseph 
refused  to  hearken  to  his  mistress's  soli- 
citations, or  '  to  be  with  her,'  we  natu- 
rally understand  the  meaning  to  be, 
that  he  declined  being  in  her  company, 
that  he  shunned  her  presence,  and  es- 
pecially that  he  avoided,  as  much  as 
possible,  being  alone  with  her.  All  this 
may  indeed  have  been  so  ;  we  think  it 
very  probable  that  it  was  ;  still  this 
does  not  by  any  means  represent  the 
true  sense  of  the  original  phrase.  The 
'  or'  is  not  found  in  the  Hebrew,  and  its 
insertion  in  our  translation  prevents  the 
precise  drift  of  the  writer  from  being 
apprehended.      The  true  rendering  re- 


sults from  the  omission  of  the  particle 
— '  he  hearkened  not  unto  her  to  lie  by 
her,  to  be  with  her  '—and  the  import  of 
'being  with  her'  unquestionably  is, 
being  united,  and  as  it  were  identified 
with  her,  so  as  in  a  sense  to  co-exist 
with  her  by  a  constructive  reciprocation 
of  being.  This  sense  is  clearly  devel- 
oped by  the  words  of  the  Apostle,  1  Cor. 
6.  16,  17, '  What?  know  ye  not  that  he 
which  is  joined  to  an  harlot  is  one  body  ? 
for  two,  sailh  he,  shall  be  one  flesh. 
But  he  that  is  joined  to  the  Lord  is  one 
spirit.'  To  be  with  one,  therefore,  in  this 
sense,  is,  in  the  eye  of  the  Scriptures, 
to  have  a  community  of  being.  This  is 
the  nature  of  the  conjugal  union,  which 
is  trenched  upon  and  invaded  by  every 
act  of  unlawful  commerce,  such  as  that 
meditated  bj'  Potiphar's  wife.' 

If  this  be  a  well-lbunded  view  of  the 
subject,  we  see  not  how  to  resist  the 
inference,  that  a  woman's  father,  mo- 
ther, brother,  and  sister,  become  by 
marriage,  in  the  divine  estimation,  the 
father,  mother,  brother,  and  sister  of 
the  man  whom  she  marries,  and  so  vice 
versa.  It  'may  indeed  be  objected  to 
this,  as  Nicodemus  objected  to  the  doc- 
trine of  regeneration,  that  it  is  impossi- 
ble to  see  how  it  can  be.  But  the  ques- 
tion is,  does  not  God  say  so  ?  And  may 
he  not,  in  the  exercise  of  his  sovereign 
authority,  declare  that  such  and  such 
relations  of  a  moral  or  covenant  kind 
shall  exist  among  his  creatures,  al- 
though they  might  seem  to  our  short- 
sighted reason  to  contravene  the  laws 
of  physical  being?  It  will  scarcely  be 
denied,  that  notwithstanding  the  dis- 
tinct personality  of  each  individual  of 
the  human  race,  there  yet  exists  some 
kind  of  economical  or  federal  union  be- 
tween  them  and  Adam,  in  consequence 
of  which  their  relations  to  law  and 
destiny  are  very  materially  affected. 
W^e  see  no  necessity  that  such  a  rela- 
tion should  be  a  matter  of  personal  con- 
sciousness. It  is  sufficient  that  it  is  a 
matter  of  divine  testimony,  and  the 
truth  or  the  fallacy  of  the  position  is  to 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


175 


be  determined  by  a  fair  and  legitimate 
construction  of  the  record  on  the  true 
sense  of  which  the  whole  matter  rests. 
So  again  it  is  clearly  affirmed  by  the 
Apostle,  Rom.  4.  11,  12,  that  there  is  a 
sense  in  which,  to  all  that  believe, 
Abraham  becomes  a  father,  though  they 
1)6  not  of  the  circumcision,  like  his  de- 
■icendanlj  after  the  flesh.  This  also  is 
not  a  fact  of  personal  consciousness,  but 
of  divine  testimony,  which  we  receive 
because,  although  the  idea  is  one  of  ra- 
ther a  subtle  nature,  we  cannot  set  aside 
the  evidence  on  which  it  rests.  In  like 
manner  may  it  not  be  possible  that 
within  certain  limits  defined  by  God, 
the  relations  formed  by  affinity  shall 
be  just  as  near  and  as  sacred  as  those 
resulting  from  consanguinity  ? 

For  ourselves  we  know  of  no  more 
interesting  view  of  the  marriage  union, 
liian  that  it  creates  to  each  of  the  par- 
ties a  new  circle  of  endeared  relatives, 
bound  together  by  ties  which  are  never 
henceforth  to  be  sundered.  What  a  field 
is  here  opened  for  the  extension  of  the 
tenderest  charities  and  the  sweetest 
sympathies  of  his  life  i  What  a  multi- 
plication of  the  cords  which,  by  binding 
firmly  together,  strengthen  the  great 
brotherhood  of  man  !  This  end  is  no 
doubt  answered  to  a  certain  extent  on 
the  opposite  theory,  that  the  relation- 
ship with  a  wife's  or  husband's  family 
ceases  as  soon  as  the  one  or  the  other  is 
removed  by  death.  But  the  tie  will 
naturally  be  regarded  of  far  slighter 
force  when  it  is  looked  upon  as  merely 
temporary  in  its  duration,  and  though 
a  mutual  friendly  intercourse  and  inter- 
est may  subsequently  be  kept  up  be- 
tween the  families-  yet  it  is  nothing 
compared  with  the  cemented  fellowship 
that  subsists  between  those  who  regard 
each  other  in  the  light  of  permanent 
kindred. 

It  is  also  to  be  remarked,  that  the 
view  now  suggested  of  the  nearness  and 
sanctity  of  the  marriage  relation,  would 
tend  more  powerfully  perhaps  than  any 
other  to  counteract  those  lax  and  law- 


less sentiments  in  regard  to  that  insti- 
tution,  which  are  unhappily  at  all  times 
too  prevalent  among  men,  and  which 
generate  a  dangerous  facility  in  the  pro- 
curement of  divorces.  The  convictions 
upon  which  thesacredness  and  stability 
of  marriage  rest,  need  to  be  reinforced 
by  every  legitimate  collateral  influence 
which  can  be  brought  to  bear  upon 
them;  and  what  can  tend  more  to  this 
than  the  consideration,  that  though  the 
connexion  itself  might  cease  at  death, 
yet  the  kindred  created  by  it  would  sur- 
vive and  live  on  undisturbed? — But  we 
pass  on  to  another  department  of  our 
preliminary  discussions. 

What  is  meant  by  the  Phrase  '  to  Un- 
cover Nakedness  ?' 

This  expression  is  evidently  of  the 
utmost  importance  in  this  connexion,  as 
defining  the  criminal  intercourse  which 
is  here  forbidden.  It  is  true,  indeed, 
that  the  phraseology  is  occasionally 
varied  in  other  parts  of  the  law,  as  we 
find  '  to  approach  to,'  '  to  lie  with,'  used 
as  equivalents  to  the  form  of  speech  be- 
fore us.  The  first  of  these,  *  to  approach 
to,'  occurs  only  in  v.  6  and  14  of  the 
present  chapter,  in  both  which  cases  it 
is  obviously  tantamount  to  having  car- 
nal connexion  with  a  woman..  The 
second,  '  to  lie  with,'  in  like  manner, 
when  employed  without  any  thing  to 
qualify  or  limit  its  meaning,  has  ob- 
viously the  generic  sense  of  sexual  in- 
tercourse, whether  within  or  without 
the  pale  of  matrimony.  It  can  scarcely 
be  necessary  to  show,  by  an  array  of 
particular  citations,  that  the  im])ort  of 
these  phrases  fairly  includes  the  sexual 
intercourse  supposed  in  the  very  idea  of 
marriage,  as  well  as  the  illicit  com- 
merce to  which  the  terms  fornication 
and  adultery  are  applied. 

The  question  returns,  then,  whether 
the  expression  before  us,  '  to  uncover 
nakedness,'  is  not  used  with  equal  lati- 
tude,  including  the  conjugal  intercourse 
of  married  parties,  as  well  as  the  sexual 
connexion  forbidden  under  the  name  of 


176 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


incestuous  fornication  and  adultery,  for 
which  many  contend  as  the  only  object 
of  prohibition  in  the  laws  now  under 
consideration.  For  ourselves,  we  are 
ready  to  admit  that  something  more  is 
prohibited  in  these  chapters  than  merely 
incestuous  marriages.  Not  only  the 
import  of  the  terms,  but  the  obvious 
drift  of  the  law,  as  indicated  by  the  cir- 
cumstances under  which  it  was  promul- 
gated, convince  us  that  it  was  intended 
to  interdict  in  general  the  various  kinds 
of  promiscuous  sexual  commerce  which 
had  prevailed  among  the  abandoned 
heathen,  and  at  the  same  time  to  em- 
brace those  incestuous  marriage  con- 
nexions to  which  many  suppose  the  law 
has  exclusive  reference.  But  having 
made  this  admission,  we  again  remark, 
that  there  is  nothing  in  the  form  of  the 
expression  itself  which  precludes  the 
sense  "of  marriage  connexions.  What- 
ever else  may  be  included  in  it,  it  is 
obvious  that  the  sense  of  connubial  in- 
\-  tercourse  is  not  necessarily  shut  out  of 
its  import.  It  is  evidently  a  euphemis- 
tic mode  of  expression,  to  convey  the 
idea  of  an  act  which  the  instinctive  sen- 
timents of  delicacy  among  all  people 
agree  to  shroud  in  language  that  shall 
rather  hint  than  declare.  But  let  us 
refer  to  the  actual  usage.  In  the  pre- 
sent chapter  the  phrase  occurs  thirteen 
times ;  these  instances  it  will  not  be 
necessary  to  cite.  In  the  twentieth 
chapter,  comprising,  for  the  most  part, 
a  repetition  of  the  precepts  of  this,  with 
the  annexed  penalties,  it  occurs  six 
times,  but  with  no  different  shade  of 
meaning.  The  next  instance  in  which 
it  occurs  is  found  Is.  47.  2,  3,  in  an 
address  to  the  '  virgin  daughter  of  Ba- 
bylon,' to  whom  it  is  said,  'Take  the 
millstones  and  grind  meal,  &c. ;  thy 
nakedness  shall  be  uncovered,  yea,  thy 
shame  shall  be  seen.'  Here  is  barely 
the  implication  of  unseemly  exposure, 
without  any  thing  to  aid  us  in  deter- 
mining the  question  of  its  drift  in  the 
connexion  before  us.  The  only  remain- 
ing cases  are  the  following,  all  occur- 


ring in  Ezekiel.  Ch.  16. 36, '  Because  thy 
filthiness  was  poured  out,  and  thy  na- 
kedness discovered  (uncovered)  through 
thy  whoredoms  with  thy  lovers,'  &c. 
Here  it  is  evident,  from  the  context, 
that  the  allusion  is  to  extra-conjugal 
licentiousness,  of  the  grossest  character. 
Thus  again,  v.  37,  '  Behold,  therefore,  I 
will  gather  all  thy  lovers,  with  whom 
thou  hast  taken  pleasure,  and  all  them 
that  thou  hast  loved,  with  all  them  that 
thou  hast  hated ;  I  will  even  gather 
them  round  about  against  thee,  and  will 
discover  (uncover)  thy  nakedness  unto 
them,  that  they  may  see  all  thy  naked' 
ness.'  This,  of  course,  is  not  the  un- 
covering that  belongs  to  marriage. 
Ezek.  22.  10,  'In  thee  have  they  dis- 
covered (uncovered)  their  fathers'  na- 
kedness :  in  thee  have  they  humbled 
her  that  was  set  apart  for  pollution.' 
This  is  entirely  parallel  to  the  use  of 
the  phrase  in  the  chapter  before  us,  and 
advances  us  no  further  towards  a  definite 
result.  Ch.  23.  10,  '  These  discovered 
(uncovered)  her  nakedness  :  they  took 
her  sons  and  her  daughters,  and  slew 
her  with  the  sword.'  There  is  no  room 
to  question  the  application  of  this  lan- 
guage to  the  pollutions  of  illicit  love. 
It  is  not  a  nuptial  nakedness  of  which 
the  prophet  here  speaks.  Thus  too 
again,  ch.  23.  18,  '  So  she  discovered 
(uncovered)  her  whoredoms,  and  discov- 
ered (uncovered)  her  nakedness  :  then 
my  mind  was  alienated  from  her.' 
Once  more,  ch.  23.  29,  '  And  they  shall 
deal  with  thee  hatefully,  and  shall  take 
away  all  thy  labor,  and  shall  leave  thee 
naked  and  bare  ;  and  the  nakedness  of 
thy  whoredoms  shall  be  discovered  (un- 
covered), both  thy  lewdness  and  thy 
whoredoms.'  The  nakedness  here  un- 
covered, is  expressly  said  to  be  that  of 
'  whoredoms,'  and  consequently  cannot 
be  that  of  marriage. 

These  are  all  the  cases  in  which  the 
phrase  occurs  in  the  Bible,  and  the  gen- 
eral result  will  doubtless  be  admitted 
to  be,  that  although  it  is  incontestably 
applied  in  several  of  the  cited  cases  to 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


177 


forbidden  sexual  intercourse,  yet  it  is 
not  equally  indubitable  that  it  is  used 
to  denote  the  lawful  intercom se  of  wed- 
lock. At  the  same  time,  as  there  is 
nothing  in  the  native  import  of  the 
terms  employed,  which  should  necessa- 
rily forbid  its  being  thus  used,  and  as 
nothing  can  be  pointed  out  in  the  cir- 
cumstances of  Its  occurrence  in  the 
other  cases  which  absolutely  shuts  us 
up  to  that  as  the  only  sense,  we  see  not 
that  any  conclusive  argument  can  be 
drawn  Irom  the  terms  of  the  law  to  re- 
strict its  prohibitions  simply  to  acts  of 
adultery  and  fornication.  At  any  rate, 
it  will  scarcely  be  questioned,  that  in 
V.  18,  the  expression,  '  Thou  shalt  not 
take  a  wife  to  her  sister,  to  vex  her,  to 
uncover  her  nakedness,'  implies  taking 
her  in  marriage,  whether  it  be  under- 
stood as  before  the  death  of  the  first 
wife  or  after.  We  observe  moreover 
that  the  meaning  of  the  terms  is  un- 
doubtedly to  be  viewed  in  connexion 
with  the  scope  of  the  law,  and  in  pro- 
portion to  the  strength  of  evidence  that 
the  law  before  us  does  not  contemplate 
merely  the  general  enormities  of  adul- 
terous intercourse,  but  the  specific  sin 
of  incest  in  its  several  forms,  in  the 
same  proportion  is  the  certainty  that  in 
these  passages  the  phrase  in  question 
conveys  the  idea  of  marriage. 

What  then  is  the  ground  for  believing 
that  no  other  than  tlie  crimes  that  came 
under  the  category  of  general  lewdness 
are  here  forbidden  ?  Can  any  sufficient 
reason  be  assigned,  why  the  crime  of 
adultery  should  here  be  forbidden  with 
all  this  minute  specification  of  cases, 
when  it  had  been  previously  so  expressly 
and  so  solemnly  denounced  by  the  terms 
of  the  seventh  commandment  ?  As  all 
are  necessarily  included  in  the  scope  of 
that  prohibition,  why  does  the  lawgiver 
here  forbid  only  those  cases  of  adultery 
which  may  take  place  with  a  mother, 
step-mother,  sister,  half-sister,  sister- 
in-law,  &c.  *  What  would  be  thought,' 
says  Mr.  Dwight, '  of  the  wisdom  of  a 
legislature  which  should  enact  a  similar 


statute  with  regard  to  any  other  crime  ; 
for  example,  that  of  horse-stealing  : — 
'  He  who  steals  the  horse  of  any  person 
shall  be  imprisoned  three  years.  He 
who  steals  his  father's  horse,  shall  be 
imprisoned  three  years.  He  who  steals 
his  brother's  horse,  shall  be  imprisoned 
three  years.  He  who  steals  the  horse 
of  his  father's  brother,  shall  be  impris- 
oned three  years,' — and  so  on  through 
a  succession  of  thirty-three  relations.' 
Again,  it  is  not  to  be  forgotten  that  the 
established  punishment  for  adultery  was 
death.  How  comes  it  then,  if  adultery 
is  the  grand  offence  interdicted  in  this 
law,  that  the  penalty,  in  several  in- 
stances, is  merely  dying  childless?  On 
the  whole,  as  any  adequate  reason  for 
understanding  solely  the  prohibition  of 
adultery  and  fornication  is  wanting, 
and  as  the  great  mass  of  the  Jewish 
and  Christian  world  have  agreed  in 
interpreting  these  laws  of  incestuous 
marriages,  it  would  seem  that  there  are 
very  strong  grounds  for  this  as  the 
most  legitimate  construction.  But 
though  this  be  granted,  still  another 
question  arises  as  to 

The  Sense  of  the  word  '  Wife  '  in  this 
Connexion. 
The  position,  as  is  well  known,  has 
been  vigorously  maintained,  that  as  the 
word  'wife'  and  not  'widow'  is  the 
word  uniformly  employed  in  these  laws, 
they  must  therefore  be  understood  as 
referring  to  women  whose  husbands 
were  still  living.  But  to  this  it  may  be 
replied,  that  Hebrew  usage  in  respect 
to  terms  expressive  of  these  relations 
must  be  regarded.  The  original  word 
rendered  'wife'  is  il-'i^  is/ia/i,  which 
is  also  the  only  term  that  the  language 
affords  for  '  woman.'  In  like  manner, 
the  Gr.  word  ywri  signifies  both  '  wo. 
man  '  and  '  wife.'  In  the  Hebrew  dic- 
tion a  man's  '  wife '  is  uniformly  his 
'  woman,'  and  nothing  would  be  more 
natural,  from  the  force  of  correct  ideas 
on  the  subject  of  the  marriage  relation, 
than  to  epeak  of  the  surviving  partner 


178 


LEVITICUS. 


[E.  C.  1490. 


of  a  man  deceased  as  his  *  woman '  or 
*  wife.'  That  this  was  actually  the 
usage  is  obvious  from  numerous  exam- 
ples. Thus  Gen.  38.  8,  'And  Judah 
said  unto  Ouan,  Go  in  unto  thy  brother's 
wife,  and  marry  her.'  Deut.  25.  5, 
'  The  wife  of  the  dead  shall  not  marry 
without  unto  a  stranger.'  Ruth  4.  5, 
'  Buy  it  of  Ruth,  the  wife  of  the  dead: 
2  Sam.  12.  10,  «  Thou  hast  taken  the 
wife  of  Uriah.'  Matt.  22.  25,  '  The 
first  died  and  loft  his  wife.'  Acts  5.  7, 
'  Ananias'  wife,  not  knowing  that  her 
husband  was  dead,'  &c. 

Such  was  the  common  usage  among 
the  Hebrews,  the  Greeks,  and  the  Ro- 
mans ;  and  such  is  that  of  the  French, 
the  Germans,  the  Spanish,  and  the 
Italians,  as  well  as  of  the  English.  In 
none  of  the  versions  of  the  Scriptures  in 
these  languages,  is  the  word  widow  in- 
troduced in  such  cases.  The  Hebrew 
has  indeed  the  word  n;?2i&<  almormh, 
signifying  widow,  but  it  is  never  used, 
as  with  us,  in  such  a  connexion  as  '  the 
widow  of  such  an  one', — '  the  widow  of 
a  father,  brother,  son,'  &c.  Instead  of 
this,  the  fixed  phraseology  in  such  cases 
is  always  '  wife.'  Its  use  is  most  pre- 
valent in  cases  where  the  writer's  object 
is  to  make  llie  state  of  widowhood,  as  a 
state  of  desolation  and  weakness,  pecu- 
liarly prominent.  Thus  Ex.  22.  22, 
'  Ye  shall  not  afflict  any  widow  or  child.' 
Deut.  14.  29,  '  The  stranger,  the  father- 
less, and  the  widow  shall  come  and  eat 
and  be  satisfied.'  Job.  24.  3,  '  They 
take  the  widow's  ox  for  a  pledge.'  Such 
is  the  more  common  usus  loquendi. 
Indeed,  it  is  remarkable,  that  in  several 
instances  the  word  n'»l'i<  wovian  or  wife, 
is  subjoined  to  nj?^^^*  almonah,  xcidow, 
equivalent  to  *  widow- woman'  or '  widow- 
wife  '  in  our  language.  Both  terms  are 
in  these  cases  generally  translated  in 
our  version,  though  occasionally  the 
latter  is  omitted.  Thus,  1  Kings  7.  14, 
'  He  was  a  widow^s  son  (nj?2^i4  Mlub^  "p 
ben  ishah  almonah,  son  of  a  widow-wife) 
of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali.'  But  wherever 
ihe  phrase  '  widow- woman '  occurs,  it  is 


[  to  be  recollected,  that  according  to  th< 
i  original    idiom,    '  widow-wife '    is    ar 
equally  proper  rendering.     We  cannot 
!  doubt,  therefore,  that  while   the   term 
i  '  wife  '  in   this  connexion  is  really  used 
I  with  such  an  extension  of  its  import  as 
;  to  embrace  the  idea  of  widow,'  it  would 
I  at  the  same   time   have   been   entirely 
contrary  to  the  prevailing  idiom  of  the 
I  language  to  have  employed  that  term. 
I  The   truth  is,  if  we  mistake   not,  llie 
term 'wife'   in   the  different  specifica- 
j  tions  of  the  law  belore  us,  is  so  usf  d  as 
to  express  the  continuity  of  the  relation, 
i  without  any  regard  to  the  fact  of  the 
!  husband's    death.      Whether   he   were 
I  living  or  dead,  it   mattered  not  ;   the 
I  prohibition  continued  in  full  force  ;  and 
1  that  not  only  from  the  common  usage 
:  of  speech,  but  from  the  nature  of  the 
i  propinquity  already  established  between 
j  the  barred  parlies.     We  do  do  not  mean 
by  this  tliat  the  relation  so  continued 
\  alter  the  death  of  either  of  the  parlies, 
j  as  to  make  it  unlawful  for  the  survivor 
to  marry  again ;  for  in  this  particular, 
a  dispensation  was  kindly  granted,  and 
the  words  of  the  apostle,  Rom.  7.  2,  3, 
apply  in  all  their  force  ;  '  For  ti)e  wo- 
man which  hath  an  husband  is  bound 
by  the  law  to  her  husband  as  long  as 
he  liveth  ;  but  if  the  husband  be  dead, 
she  is  loosed  from  the  law  of  her  hus- 
j  band  —  so   that    she   is  no   adulteress, 
i  though  she  be  married  to  another  man.' 
j  But  we  do  not  perceive  that  this  annuls 
]  the    relationships    previously   existing 
I  between  those  who  are  brought  together 
I  by  affinity,  nor  is  there  any  fairness  in 
quoting  the  apostle's  words  to  such  a 
I  puri)ose,as  his  drift  was  entirely  differ- 
ent.    Take  for  instance  the  case  of  the 
step-mother,  the  father's  wife.    What 
originally  constituted   the  propinquity 
between  her  and  her  step-son,  that  ren- 
I  dered  it  unlawful  for  him  to  marry  her? 
:  Plainly   the  fact,  that   the  father  had 
{  consummated  marriage  with  her.     In 
[  the  language  of  the  law  slie  then  be* 
I  came  '  one  flesh'  with  him.     As  sooa 
I  as  this  became  a  fact,  the  propinquity 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


179 


became  complete.  How  could  the  death 
of  the  fullior  undo  this  pre-existent  fact, 
aiul  cause  ihe  constituted  relation  be- 
tween the  step-moiher  and  the  step-sou 
to  cease  ?  So  as  to  a  sister  ;  she  does 
not  lose  the  propinqailj-  which  she  has 
in  common  wiih  me,  either  at  my  fa- 
ther's deatii,  or  at  her  marriage  ;  be- 
cause lier  propinquity  is  founded  on  a 
pre-existent  fact,  which  can  never  cease 
to  be  a  fact.  How  then  can  we  resist 
tlie  inference,  that  the  sister  of  a  wife 
continues  to  he  a  sister,  after  the  death 
of  the  wife,  just  as  she  was  before,  and 
consequently  is  never  to  be  approached 
in  the  nuptial  relation  ?  Does  the 
maxim  admit  of  controversy,  that  any 
person,  with  whom,  at  any  time,  it 
would  have  been  incest  to  cohabit,  will 
forever  remain  forbidden  ?  The  ques- 
tion seems  unequivocally  determined 
by  the  principle  of  affinity  arising  out 
of  the  nature  of  the  marriage  union. 

Are  these  Laws  still  binding  upon  ChriS' 
tians  at  the  present  Bay  ? 
This  of  course  is  a  question  of  the 
utmost  moment,  in  the  present  connex- 
ion. It  is  comparatively  a  matter  of 
little  consequence  to  ascertain  whether 
the  marriage  in  question  was  forbidden 
to  tlie  Jews,  provided  the  statute  re- 
specting it  was  among  those  portions 
of  the  law  which  have  been  abolished 
under  the  gospel.  This  latter  position 
IS  of  course  most  strenuously  maintained 
by  those  who  hold  to  the  lawfulness  of 
the  marriage  in  question.  By  them  it 
is  contended  that  these  laws  are  purely 
ceremonial,  forming  a  part  of  that  code 
which  is  abrogated  by  Christ.  They 
occur,  it  is  said,  in  the  midst  of  enact- 
ments which  are  confessedly  Levitical, 
and  accompanied  by  no  notes  of  dis- 
crimination which  mark  them  out  as 
having  a  moral  and  permanent  authority. 
For  aught  that  appears,  they  are  no 
more  bindi.n^-  on  us  than  the  precepts 
relative  to  wearing  linsey-woolsey  gar- 
ments, or  sowing  diverse  seeds  in  the 
same  field  or  raising  a  mixed  breed  of 


cattle.  That  code,  as  a  code,  ha.s  be. 
come  to  us  antiquated,  and  if  we  receive 
certain  of  its  moral  precepts,  it  is  not 
because  we  admit  the  authority  of  the 
Levitical  law;  but  because  of  their  own 
intrinsic  equity  or  wisdom. 

Again,  it  is  affirmed,  that  if  the^e 
enactments  are  binding  upo.M  us  at  this 
day,  it  must  be  because  the  connexions 
forbidden  involve  an  essential  immoral- 
ity. But  in  this  case,  God  never  would 
have  sanctioned  them  under  any  cir- 
cumstances. Yet  we  perceive  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  that  the  first  marriages 
in  the  family  of  Adam  must  necessarily 
have  been  between  brother  and  sister, 
so  far  at  least  as  regards  Cain  and  Abel, 
and  probably  Adam's  other  children. 
It  was,  moreover,  an  express  statute, 
that  in  case  that  a  brother  died  child- 
less, the  surviving  brother  was  not  only 
permitted,  but  required  to  marry  his 
widow.  If  such  connexions  then  are 
intrinsically  wrong,  how  could  they 
have  been  allowed  in  the  instances 
cited  ? 

To  this  it  is  replied,  on  the  other 
hand,  that  there  is  nothing  of  a  ceremo- 
nial nature  in  the  law  regulating  mar- 
riage connexions.  The  institution  of 
marriage  was  intended,  not  for  the  Jews 
but  for  the  whole  world.  As  such,  the 
laws  by  which  its  Author  has  seen  fit 
to  qualify,  guard,  and  govern  it,  are 
bindmg  alike  upon  all  nations  and  in  all 
times.  These  laws  are  contained  in  the 
chapters  before  us  ;  and  if  they  are  not 
now  obligatory,  then  it  follows  that  we 
have  nothing  in  the  compass  of  the 
whole  Bible  regulating  the  subject  of 
marriage  alliances — nothing  to  forbid  a 
man  marrying  his  own  mother,  sister,, 
or  daughter  !  They  occur,  indeed,  in 
the  midst  of  a  multitude  of  enactments, 
peculiar  to  the  Levitical  economy.  But 
this  is  no  more  than  holds  good  of  a 
vast  variety  of  other  moral  precepts, 
the  universally  binding  nature  of  which 
no  one  questions.  The  moral  law  is 
indeed  summarily  comprised  in  the 
decalogue,  yet  the  letter  and  spirit  of 


180 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


this  divme  code  are  illustrated  and  con- 
firmed by  subsequent  explanatory  pre- 
cepts, which  are  intermingled  often  in 
the  same  chapter,  and  sometimes  in  the 
same  paragraph  with  the  purely  ritual 
or  ecclesiastical  laws.  One  has  only 
to  turn  his  eye  over  the  three  or  four 
connected  chapters  in  this  book,  to  find 
the  repeated  occurrence  of  such  pre- 
cepts as  the  following: — 'Thou  shalt 
love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thine 
heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with 
all  thy  might.'—*  Thou  shalt  fear  the 
Lord  thy  God ;  him  shalt  thou  serve, 
and  to  him  shalt  thou  cleave,  and  swear 
hy  his  name.'—'  Thou  shalt  do  that 
which  is  right  and  good  in  the  sight  of 
the  Lord.' — '  Thou  shalt  worship  no 
other  God.' — '  Ye  shall  keep  my  Sab- 
bath, and  reverence  my  sanctuary.' — 
'  Thou  shalt  not  hate  thy  brother  in  thy 
heart.'—'  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor 
as  thyself.' — '  Ye  shall  not  afilict  any 
widow  or  fatherless  child.' — '  Thou 
shalt  not  arrest  judgment,  thou  shalt 
not  respect  persons,  neither  take  a  gift.' 
— '  That  which  is  altogether  just  shalt 
thou  follow.' — '  Thou  shalt  have  a  per- 
fect and  just  weight,  a  perfect  and  just 
measure  shalt  thou  have.' — '  Thou  shalt 
keep  the  commandments  of  the  Lord 
thy  God,  to  walk  in  his  ways  and  to 
fear  him.' 

No  one  can  imagine  for  a  moment 
that  these  precepts  are  ceremonial  and 
binding  on  the  Jews  only.  Many  of 
them  are  expressly  cited  and  applied  in 
the  New  Testament.  But  if  they  were 
not,  still  their  authority  remains  una- 
bated. The  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment are  received  by  all  Christians  as 
inspired  volumes,  and  they  hesitate  not 
to  accept  its  moral  and  ethical  code  as 
equally  binding  with  that  of  the  New. 
As  every  other  command  of  the  deca- 
logue is  recognized  and  fortified  by  par- 
ticular precepts  here  and  there  inter- 
spersed, the  same  may  be  expected, 
a  priori,  in  regard  to  the  seventh.  That 
command  preserved  the  honor  of  the 
marriage  union  after  it  was  formed  ; 


but  it  left  many  questions  undecided 
respecting  the  parties  who  might  law- 
fully enter  wedlock.  It  was  extremely 
important  to  be  made  known  whether 
the  ordinance  w-as  left  free,  without  any 
restraint  or  limits,  or  whether  there 
I  were  any  prohibitions  on  the  score  of 
degrees  of  kindred.  There  must  be  a 
law  somewhere  in  the  Mosaic  code  to 
ascertain  who  may  and  who  may  not  be 
united  in  marriage.  Where  shall  that 
law  be  found,  if  not  in  the  chapters  be- 
fore us  ;  and  if  found  there,  what  reason 
can  be  urged  for  its  having  become  ob- 
solete ?  Are  we  to  be  driven  to  tlie 
alternative  of  admitting  that  we  are  left 
without  a  single  passage  or  paragraph 
in  the  whole  compass  of  revelation 
bearing  upon  the  degrees  of  relationship 
Avithin  which  marriage  may  or  may  not 
be  contracted  ? 

Again,  the  connexions  forbidden  in 
these  statutes  arc  those  which  are  pro- 
nounced abominable  in  the  depraved 
Canaanites  and  Egyptians.  But  what 
could  have  rendered  incest  a  crime 
among  these  abandoned  heathen  ?  They 
had  not  the  written  law,  and  where  there 
is  no  law  there  is  no  transgression.  If 
the  prohibitory  code  was  peculiar  only 
to  the  Jews,  what  binding  power  could 
it  have  upon  the  Gentiles,  who  were 
strangers  to  the  Jews  ?  What  was  the 
law  which,  in  this  matter,  they  had 
transgressed  ?  There  surely  must  have 
been  some  flagrant  infraction  of  the 
mandates  of  heaven,  to  draw  down  such 
dire  denunciations,  and  such  wasting 
judgments  as  are  spoken  of  in  this  con- 
nexion. Vv.  24, 25,  '  Defile  not  ye  your- 
selves in  any  of  these  things  :  for  in  all 
these  the  nations  are  defiled  which  I 
cast  out  before  you  :  and  the  land  is  de- 
filed :  therefore  I  do  visit  the  iniquity 
thereof  upon  it,  and  the  land  itself  vom- 
iteth  out  her  inhabitants.'  What  can 
account  for  the  severity  of  this  judg- 
ment but  the  fact,  that  in  perpetrating 
these  enormities,  they  were  transgress, 
ing  a  moral  code — a  law  which,  as  it 
was  in  force  before  the  existence  of  the 


B.  C.  M90.1 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


181 


Mosaic  dispensation,  so  it  is  equally  in 
iorce  after  it,  even  in  our  own  land  and 
all  future  lime.  That  there  has  been 
no  repeal  of  the  law  under  the  New 
JV^talnellt,  is  plain  from  the  two  in- 
^laices  which  are  mentioned  but  to  be 
ct'iuleniiied.  When  John  reproved  Herod 
I'nr  laliing  his  brother's  Philip's  wife, 
i.ul  l()>t  his  life  for  his  fidelity,  his  de- 
iituiciuiou  was  but  an  echo  of  the  di- 
ri'ci  language  of  the  word  of  God  as 
!!■  re  recorded  ;  and  the  horror  ex- 
pressed by  Paul  at  a  man's  taking  his 
iailier's  wife,  an  ofTence  not  so  much  as 
named  among  the  Gentiles,  goes  une- 
quivocally to  prove  that  he  knew  nothing 
of  any  abrogation  of  the  law  of  incest. 
As  to  the  objection  brought  from  the 
case  of  marriages  in  Adam's  family, 
and  from  that  of  the  brother's  widow 
who  was  childless,  we  adopt  the  reply 
given  by  Prof.  Hodge  (Bib.  Rep.  July, 
1842).  *  It  is  obvious  the  argument 
proves  too  much.  If  the  command  that 
one  brother  should  take  the  child- 
less widow  of  another  brother  as  his 
wife,  proves  that  it  is  not  wrong  for  a 
man  to  marry  his  sister-in-law,  then  the 
command  to  the  immediate  sons  of 
Adam  to  marry  their  sisters,  proves 
that  it  is  right  now  for  brothers  to  marry 
their  sisters.  This  objection  is  founded 
upon  the  confusion  of  two  very  different 
things.  There  are  things  which  are 
inherently  and  essentially  wrong,  and 
can  in  no  possible  case  be  right ;  as 
hatred  of  God  and  malevolence  towards 
men.  The  prohibitions  of  such  things 
arise  out  of  the  very  nature  of  God,  and 
are  as  immutable  as  that  nature.  But 
there  are  other  things  which  are  wrong 
only  in  virtue  of  a  divine  prohibition  ; 
and  this  prohibition  may  be  founded 
either  on  temporary  considerations,  or 
such  as  are  permanent.  But  in  either 
case,  whenever  the  prohibition  is  re- 
moved or  the  opposite  commanded,  the 
guilt  of  the  action  ceases.  It  was  a  sin 
in  any  Israelite  not  to  circumcise  his 
child  on  the  eighth  day  ;  but  if  God 
commanded  any  one  to  defer  the  rite  or 


omit  it  altogether,  it  was  of  course  his 
duty  to  comply.  It  was  forbidden  to 
the  Hebrews  to  labor  on  the  Sabbath, 
but  in  many  cases,  labor  on  that  day 
was  a  duty.  These  are  cases  of  positive 
commands.  But  further  than  this,  it 
is  sinful  to  take  the  property  of  others 
without  their  consent,  but  if  God  com- 
manded the  Israelites  to  take  the  pro- 
perty  of  the  Egyptians,  it  was  right  for 
them  to  do  so.  It  is  a  sin  to  kill  a  hu- 
man being,  yet  God  commanded  the 
Hebrews  to  extirpate  the  Canaanites. 
We  all  admit  that  bigamy  is  a  sin,  but 
if  any  man  will  produce  a  command  of 
God  to  marry  two  wives,  no  one  will 
deny  his  right  to  do  so.  It  is  a  sin  for 
a  brother  to  marry  his  sister,  but  if  re- 
quired by  a  divine  command,  it  is  a  sin 
no  longer.  Thus,  also,  if  any  one  can 
produce  a  divine  command  to  marry  his 
sister-in-law,  the  lawfulness  of  the  mar- 
riage will  be  readily  admitted.  All 
these  commands  belong  to  the  same 
class  ;  they  all  express  the  will  of  God 
as  to  the  duties  of  men  in  the  permanent 
relations  of  society,  and  are  therefore 
of  permanent  obligation  ;  yet  any  one 
or  all  of  them  may  be  set  aside  by  him 
in  whose  hands  are  all  his  creatures, 
and  whose  nature  and  relations,  and  the 
resulting  duties,  may  be  modified  at 
will.  That  an  Israelite,  therefore,  un- 
der peculiar  circumstances  and  for  spe- 
cified reasons  was  commanded  to  marry 
his  brother's  wife,  no  more  proves  that 
the  general  law  on  this  subject  is  not 
binding,  than  the  command  to  Abraham 
to  sacrifice  Isaac  proves  that  the  com- 
mand, thou  shalt  not  kill,  is  not  moral 
and 'permanent.  That  the  Levitical 
law  of  marriage  is  still  binding  upon 
us,  we  think  is  proved  by  what  has 
already  been  said.  It  is  the  expression 
of  the  will  of  God  in  reference  to  rela- 
tionships which  still  exist  among  men. 
It  tells  us  what  is  the  duty  of  near  rela- 
tives. It  tells  us  that  brothers  and  sisters 
must  not  intermarry,  not  because  they 
were  Jews,  but  because  of  their  rela- 
tionship.    It  extends  the  prohibition  to 


182 


LEVITICUS. 


[R.  C.  1490. 


all  who  are  near  of  kin,  because  they 
are  near  of  kin.  It  is  as  much  a  law 
for  us  therefore  as  any  other  expression 
of  the  will  of  God.  The  binding  au- 
tlioriiy  of  this  law  is  recognized  in  the 
New  Testanieut,  just  as  the  continued 
obligiition  ol'  the  original  law  of  mar- 
iiage  is  recognized.  We  find  no  express 
fissertinn  that  marriage  must  be  between 
one  man  and  one  woman,  but  the  ex- 
pression of  the  will  of  God  at  the  crea- 
tion, is  held  to  bind  all  ages  and  na- 
tions. Thus,  though  there  is  no  ex- 
press declaration,  that  near  relatives 
must  not  marry,  it  is  plain  from  the 
language  of  the  apostle  to  the  Corin- 
thians, that  he  considered  the  original 
revelation  on  this  subject  as  still  our 
rule  of  duty.' 

Do  these  Laws  include  Degrees  not  ex- 
pressly Specified  ? 

The  consideration  of  this  question 
we  may  introduce  in  the  words  of 
Michaelis,  subjoining  his  own  opinion 
on  it. 

*  There  arises  the  question,  Whether 
Moses  only  prohibits  the  marriages 
which  he  expressly  mentions,  or  others 
beside  not  mentioned,  where  the  degree 
of  relationship  is  the  same  ?  This 
question,  wliich  is  of  so  great  impor- 
tance in  the  marriage-laws  of  Christian 
nations,  and  which  from  an  imperfect 
knowledge  of  oriental  customs  has  been 
the  subject  of  so  much  controversy,  pro- 
perly regards  the  following  marriages, 
viz. : — 

1.  With  a  brother's  daughter. 

2.  Willi  a  sister's  daughter. 

3.  With  a  maternal  uncle's  widow. 

4.  With  a  brother's  son's  widow. 

5.  With  a  sister's  son's  widow. 

6.  With  a  deceased  wife's  sister 

<  These  marriages  we  may,  perhaps, 
for  brevity's  sake,  be  allowed  to  denom- 
inate the  six  marriages,  or  the  conse- 
quential marriages.  They  are  as  near 
as  those  which  are  prohibited.  Moses 
never  mentions  them  in  his  marriage 
statutes,  yet  the  ground  of  his  prohibi- 


tions is  nearness  of  relationship.  The 
question,  therefore,  is,  Are  these  mar- 
riages to  be  or  not  to  be  considered  as 
prohibited  by  just  inference  from  the 
letter  of  his  laws? 

'  In  my  ojiinion  they  are  not. 

*  My  reasons  for  denying  and  protest- 
ing against  the  conclusions  are  the  fol- 
lowing : 

'  1.  Moses  does  not  appear  to  have 
framed  or  given  his  marriage-laws  with 
any  view  to  our  deducing,  or  acting 
upon  conclusions  which  we  might  think 
fit  to  deduce  from  them:  for  if  this  was 
his  view,  he  has  made  several  repeti- 
tions in  ihem  which  are  really  very 
useless.  What  reason  had  he,  for  ex- 
ample, after  forbidding  marriage  with  <i 
father's  sister,  to  forbid  it  also  with  a 
mother's,  if  this  second  prohibition  was 
included  in  the  first,  and  if  he  meant, 
without  saying  a  word  on  the  subject, 
to  be  understood  as  speaking,  not  of 
particular  marriages,  but  of  degrees? 

'  2.  Moses  has  given  his  marriage- 
laws  in  two  different  places  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch, viz. :  in  both  the  ISth  and  20th 
chapters  of  Leviticus  ;  but  in  the  latter 
of  these  passages  we  find  only  the  very 
same  cases  specified  which  had  been 
specified  in  the  former.  Now  had  they 
been  meant  merely  as  examples  of  de- 
grees of  relationship,  it  would  have 
been  more  rational  to  have  varied  them ; 
and  if  it  had  been  said,  for  instance,  on 
the  first  occasion.  Thou  shalt  not  marry 
thy  father^s  sister,  to  have  introduced, 
on  the  second,  the  converse  case,  and 
said.  Thou  shalt  not  marry  thy  hrother^i 
daughter.  This,  however,  is  not  done 
by  Moses,  who  in  the  second  enactment 
just  specifies  the  f^ither's  sister  as  be- 
fore,  and  seems,  therefore,  to  have  in- 
tended that  he  should  be  understood  as 
having  in  his  view  no  other  marriages 
than  those  which  he  expressly  names  j 
unless  we  choose  to  interpret  his  laws 
in  a  manner  to  his  own  meaning  and 
design.' 

It  can  scarcely  be  maintained  that 
there  is  any  thing  conclusive  in  either 


B-  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


183 


of  these  remarks.  As  to  the  repetitions, 
we  need  to  know  more  respecting  the 
actual  condition  and  social  usages  of 
the  peculiar  people  before  we  can  pro- 
nounce them  to  be  useless.  So  also  as 
"to  varying  the  speciticaiions  in  the  I8lh  I 
and  20lh  chapters.  We  are  not  com- 
petent to  say,  a  priori,  what  method  of 
laying  down  these  statutes  was  the 
most  proper;  and  we  are  always  upon 
dubious  ground  in  holding  it  to  be  '  ra- 
tional to  expect '  that  the  word  of  God 
should  be  constructed  in  any  different 
manner  from  what  it  is. 

The  fact  is,  that  certain  express  pro- 
hibitions are  contained  in  these  chap- 
ters, and  the  question  is,  whether,  on 
legitimate  principles  of  interpretation, 
certain  other  prohibitions  touching  de- 
grees of  kindred  precisely  similar  are 
not  also  involved.  As  to  the  marriage 
with  a  deceased  wife's  sister,  it  is  ad- 
mitted that  we  do  not  find  it  in  so  many 
words  forbidden.  But  we  find  the  par- 
allel case  of  the  brother's  widow  for- 
bidden, and  as  the  relation  is  the  same, 
it  is  contended  that  by  parity  of  rea- 
soning the  former  also  must  be  under- 
stood to  be  forbidden.  The  inference 
is  held  to  be  unimpeachable  for  the 
reason  that  the  degree  of  relationship 
is  the  very  ground  of  the  prohibitions. 
A  man  must  not  marry  his  half-sister, 
because  she  is  his  sister;  a  man  must 
not  marry  his  aunt,  because  she  is  the 
near  relative  of  his  father  or  mother  ;  a 
man  must  not  marry  his  brother's  wife, 
because  she  is  so  nearly  related  to  his 
brother  ;  a  man  must  not  marry  the 
daughter  or  grand-daughter  of  his  wife, 
'  because  they  arc  her  near  kinswomen  ; 
it  is  wickedness.'  Relationship  to  his 
wife  is  the  very  ground  of  the  prohibi- 
tion. The  law  itself,  therefore,  both  in 
its  general  statement,  and  in  its  partic- 
ular specifications,  gives  the  rule  of  its 
own  interpretation.  It  is  the  degree  of 
kindred  which  the  law  itself  teaches  us 
is  to  be  considered.  Shall  we  say  then 
that  a  marriage  coming  within  the  scope 
of  any  of  these  prohibitions,  is  not  con- 


trary to  the  mind  of  God  ?  Shall  God 
say  that  two  brothers  shall  not  marry 
the  sam.e  woman,  because  it  is  an  un- 
clean and  wicked  thing  for  such  near 
kindred  as  a  brother-in  law  and  a  sister- 
in-law  to  marry  ;  and  shall  we  say  this 
law  allows  two  sisters  to  marry  the 
same  man,  although  thereby  a  brother- 
in-law  and  sister-in-law  intermarry  ? 
Are  not  two  sisters  as  '  near  of  kin'  to 
each  other  as  two  brothers  are?  And 
is  not  a  sister-in-law  just  as  near  of 
kin  to  her  brother-in-law  in  the  one  case 
as  in  the  other  ?  And  is  not  nearness 
of  kin  the  entire  ground  of  all  the  pro- 
hibitions? 

Besides,  the  principle  that  no  one 
is  bound  by  any  thing  which  is  not 
expressly  affirmed — that  no  construc- 
tive or  inferential  duties  are  ^taught  in 
the  Scriptures — would  seem  to  be  one 
that  leads  to  the  most  dangerous  results. 
If  the  principle  of  inference  or  impli- 
cation  is  not  to  be  employed  in  the  in- 
terpretation, then  it  follows  that  a  man 
may  lawfully  marry  his  own  daughter, 
for  this  is  nowhere  expressly  forbidden. 
If  inferences  are  not  binding  in  the  in- 
terpretation of  the  divine  law,  then  we 
would  ask  for  the  express  command 
which  was  violated  by  Nadab  and 
Abihu  in  offering  strange  fire,  and  which 
cost  them  their  lives  ?  Any  prohibition 
in  set  terms  on  that  subject  will  be 
sought  for  in  vain.  So  again,  did  not 
our  Saviour  tell  the  Sadducees  that  they 
ought  to  have  inferred  that  the  doctrine 
of  the  resurrection  was  true,  from  what 
God  said  to  Moses  at  the  bush  ?  When 
it  is  expressly  declared,  moreover,  that 
'  whosoever  siealeth  a  man  and  selleth 
him  shall  surely  be  put  to  death,'  is  it 
an  unfair  inference  that  he  that  stole  a 
u-oman  or  a  child  was  to  be  subjected 
to  the  same  punishment  ?  On  the  whole 
'  it  seems  necessary  to  admit,  that  as  the 
I  law  makes  nearness  of  kin  the  sole  cri- 
:  terion  by  which  to  determine  whether  a 
given  marriage  be  lawful  or  not,  there- 
I  fore  if  it  declares  a  degree  of  nearness 
I  of  kin  in  any  one  case  so  great  as  to 


184 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


3  t  After  the  doings  of  the  land 


AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo-    of  Egypt  wherein  ye  dwelt,  shall 
ses,  savinsT,  i  ve  not   do:  and   c  aftpr   thp  Hnlno-a 


ses,  saying, 
2  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  ihera,  a  I  am  the 
Lord  your  God. 

aver.  4.  Exod.  6.  7.  ch.  11.  44,  and  19.4, 
10,  34,  aud  20. 7.     Ezek.  20.  S,  7,  19,  -20. 

render  marriage  unlawful,  it  virtually 
declares  an  equal  degree  of  propinquity 
in  another  case  to  be  an  effectual  bar  to 
marriage. 

As  the  ensuing  notes  will  resume  the 
consideration  of  various  details  con- 
nected with  the  subject,  it  will  be  un- 
necessary to  prolong  our  introductory 
remarks.  To  those  who  would  extend 
their  inquiries  more  minutely  into  the 
essential  merits  of  the  question,  the 
following  authorities  may  be  indicated 
as  covering  very  nearly  the  whole 
ground.  Selden  de  Uxore  Hebraica. — 
The  Cases  of  Marriages  between  Near 
Kindred,  particularly  considered  with 
respect  to  the  Doctrine  of  Scripture,  the 
Law  ol'  Nature,  and  the  Laws  of  Eng- 
land. By  John  Fry.  Lond.  1756  (a 
work  of  rare  occurrence). — Pres.  Ed- 
ward's (the  Younger)  Works,  vol.  2. 
Serm.  7.— Rev.  Dr.  B.  Trumbull's  Ap- 
peal to  the  Public  relative  to  the  Un- 
lawiulness  of  Marrying  a  Wife's  Sister. 
— Rev.  Dr.  J.  H.  Livingston's  Disserta- 
tion on  the  Marriage  of  a  Man  with  his 
Sister-in-law. — Christian  Magazine, vol. 
4.  p.  SO,  kc.  A  Brief  Inquiry  into  the 
Lawfulness  of  Marrying  a  deceased 
Wife's  Sister.— Rev.  S.  E.  Dwight's 
Hebrew  Wife  ;  or  the  Law  of  Marriage 
examined  in  relation  to  the  Lawfulness 
of  Polygamy,  and  to  the  Extent  of  the 
Law  of  Incest. — Marshall's  Review  of 
the  preceding  work  of  D wight. — Rev. 
C.  M'lvers's  Essay  concerning  the  Un- 
lawfulness of  a  Man's  Marriage  with 
his  Sister  by  Affinity. — To  the  above 
we  may  add  two  very  able  discussions 
of  the  subject  in  a  more  ephemeral 
form,  both  advocating  the  lawfulness 
gf  the  marriage  in  question,  the  one 


ye  not  do:  and  c  after  the  doings 
of  the  land  of  Canaan  whither°I 
bring  you,  shall  ye  not  do :  neither 
shall  ye  walk  in  their  ordinances. 

b  Ezek.  20.  7,  S,  and  23.  8.    c  Exod.  23.  24. 
ch.  20.  23.     Deut.  12.  4,30,  31. 


published  in  the  New  York  Observer  of 
Aug.  6,  1842,  the  other  a  series  of  six 
letters  published  in  the  New  England 
Puritan,  in  the  months  of  July  and 
August,  1842.  The  report  also  of  the 
discussions  in  the  General  Assembly 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church  of  1842, 
contained  in  the  New  York  Observer  of 
June  11,  and  in  the  Princeton  Biblical 
Repertory  of  July,  1842,  embody  a 
large  mass  of  valuable  argument  on  the 
general  subject,  the  substance  of  all  of 
which  is  well  worthy  of  being  pre- 
served in  more  permanent  form. 

General  Preface  to  the  Marriage  Laws. 

1.  Say  unto  them,  I  am  the  Lord  your 
God.  These  words  constitute  the  grand 
authoritative  sanction  of  all  the  ensuing 
laws,  implying  that  they  respect  a  mat- 
ter of  the  utmost  importance,  one  in 
which  the  honor  and  glory  of  the  great 
God  were  most  deeply  involved.  Al- 
though the  God  of  all,  he  was  in  a  spe- 
cial and  emphatic  sense  the  God  of  the 
nation  of  Israel,  with  whom  they  were 
in  covenant,  whom  they  professed  to 
serve,  and  to  whom  they  were  under 
the  greatest  obligations  imaginable. 
The  phrase  occurs  six  times  in  the  pre- 
sent chapter,  and  still  oftener  in  the 
next. 

3.  After  the  doings  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  wherein  ye  dwelt,  shall  ye  not 
do.  Heb.  n'r2??2i  kemalisth,  according 
to  the  doing  or  practising.  Gr.  Kara  ra 
eirirr]SevfjaTa,  according  to  the  customs, 
visages,  institutes.  To  what  extent  the 
crimes  here  forbidden  prevailed  among 
these  heathen  nations,  may  be  learned 
from  various  intimations  scattered  here 
and  there  through  the  Scriptures,  and 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


185 


4  dYe  shall  do  ray  judgments, 
and  keep  mine  ordinances,  to  walk 
therein  ;  I  am  the  Lord  your  God. 

0  Ye  shall  therefore  keep  my  sta- 


d  Deut.  4.  I 
e  Ezek.  20.  11, 
10.  5.     Gal.  3.  12 


2,  and  6.   1. 
13,21.    Luke 


Ezek.  20.  19. 
10.  28.    Rom. 


from  the  records  of  profane  history. 
Upon  these  we  cannot  afford  the  space 
to  dwell  at  any  length  ;  especially  as  it 
is  more  important  for  our  present  pur- 
))ose  to  call  attention  to  the  fact,  that 
these  nations,  in  committing  these 
abominations,  sinned.  But  against 
what  law  ?  Where  there  is  no  law 
there  is  no  transgression  ;  and  as  neither 
the  Egyptians  nor  the  Canaanites  were 
in  possession  of  the  Mosaical  code,  it 
would  seem  to  follow  of  necessity,  that 
the  practices  here  forbidden  were  vio- 
lations of  some  more  primitive  law  than 
the  ceremonial  institute  of  the  Jewsj 
and  consequently  that  they,  in  being 
guilty  of  them,  would  be  transgressing 
not  merely  a  set  of  positive  precepts 
delivered  by  the  hand  of  Moses,  but 
also  that  moral  constitution  which  had 
been  in  force  from  the  earliest  ages  of 
the  world; — in  a  word,  that  the  mar- 
riages here  forbidden  were  always  re- 
garded as  incestuous,  and  are  therefore 

always    unlawful. IT   Neither    shall 

ye  walk  in  their  ordinances.  Heb. 
Cn'^ripni  behukkothehem  ;  that  is,  their 
laws,  st?.lutes,  or  institutions;  for  so 
are  their  iniquitous  customs  called, 
which  by  general  prevalence  and  coun- 
tenance had  become  so  inveterate,  and 
so  deeply  rooted  and  grounded  in  the 
corrupt  affections  of  all  classes,  that 
they  had  come  to  be  regarded  in  the 
light,  and  to  possess  all  the  force,  of  so 
many  laws  and  solemn  institutions. 
This  laid  their  abettors  open  to  the  woe 
denounced  against  those  who  '  decreed 
unrighteous  decrees,  and  who  *  framed 
mischief  by  a  law.'  Indeed,  it  is  pos- 
sible that  the  word  may  have  respect  to 
positive  enactments  ;  yet  whatever  they 
may  have  been,  the  purport  of  the  pre- 
16* 


tutes  and  my  judgments :  e  which 
if  a  man  do,  he  shall  live  in  them : 
f  I  am  the  Lord. 
6  H  None  of  you  shall  approach 
to  any  that  is  near  of  kin  to  him, 

f  Exod.  6.  2,  6,  29.     Mai.  3.  6. 


cept  to  the  Israelites  is,  '  Do  ye  not 
after  the  manner  of  these  nations,  al- 
though their  conduct  may  be  allowed 
by  the  settled  laws  of  their  country  ;  for 
ye  are  not  to  regard  their  practices  any 
the  more  justifiable  on  that  account ;' 
thus  teaching  us,  that  neither  common 
usage  nor  statute  law  can  sanctify  that 
which  is  in  itself  wrong. 

4.  Ye  shall  do  my  judgments,  Sac. 
Peculiar  emphasis  is  here  to  be  put 
upon  the  word  '  my,'  which  is  equiva- 
lent to  '  mine  only ;'  as  the  phrase 
'  Him  shalt  thou  serve,'  Deut.  6.  13,  is 
expounded  by  our  Savior,  '  Him  only 
shalt  thou  serve,'  Mat.  4. 10. 

5.  Which  if  a  man  do  he  shall  live  in 
them.  Rather,  *  shall  live  by  them.' 
This  the  ancient  versions  and  commen- 
tators generally  understood  as  equiva- 
lent to  '  Shall  have  eternal  life.'  Thus 
the  Chal.  '  Shall  live  by  them  to  life 
eternal.'  So  also  Solom.  Jarchi, '  Shall 
live  in  the  world  that  is  to  come.' 
But  as  the  term  'life,'  'living,'  or  'to 
live,'  is  frequently  used  in  the  Scrip- 
tures to  denote  living  happily,  prosper- 
ously,  and  free  from  calamity,  the  prob- 
ability  is,  that  it  is  to  be  so  taken  in  the 
passage  before  us.  He  shall  in  conse- 
quence of  this  his  obedience  be  favored 
to  enjoy  a  long  and  happy  life,  whereas 
by  disobedience  he  shall  be  exposed  to 
be  judicially  cut  off.  The  apostle  con- 
trasts this  legal  promise  made  to  works, 
with  the  gospel  promise  made  to  faith, 
Gal.  3.  11,12.    Rom.  10.  5-9. 

General  Law  of  Incest. 

6.  None  of  you  shall  approach,  &c. 
Heb.  in^pn  ii^  ID^Vi  iD^i<  isk  ish  lo 
tikrebu,  man,  man,  ye  shall  not  ap' 
proach  ;  i.  e.  none  of  you.    The  phrase 


186 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


to  uncover  their  nakedness :  I  am  ]  or  the  nakedness  of  thy  mother, 
the  Lord.  I  shalt  thou  not  uncover:  she  is  thy 

7  gThe  nakedness  of  thy  father,  j  mother,  thou  shalt  not  uncover  her 

nakedness. 


S  ch.  20.  11. 


is  taken  in  a  wide  sense  by  the  Tal- 
mudists,  as  equivalent  lo  neither  Jew 
nor  Gentile ;  for  all  mankind,  ihey 
affirm,  are  comprehended  under  these 
laws  of  incest.  Indeed  the  Karaite 
Jews,  the  most  strenuous  advocates  for 
a  strict  interpetation,  and  the  most 
decided  opponents  to  Talmudical  com- 
ments, insist  upon  this  as  the  true 
sense.  The  original  term  is  '  approach,' 
frequently  used  by  way  of  euphemism, 
to  convey  the  idea  of  sexual  intercourse, 
as  in  Gen.  20.  4,  'Abimelech  had  not 
come  near  (li^p  5^p  lo  karab)  unto  her.' 
Is.  8.  3,  '  And  I  went  in  unto  (mpX 
ekrab)  the  prophetess,  and  she  con- 
ceived,' &c.  Comp.  Ezek.  18.  6.  In 
the  particular  precepts  following  in  this 
chapter  and  in  the  twentieth  chapter, 
this  prohibited  intercourse  is  pointed 
out  by  the  phrases  *  to  uncover  the  na- 
kedness,' *  to  lake,'  and  'to  lie  with.' 
The  first  phrase  therefore  has  the  same 
meaning  with  each  of  the  other  three  ; 
and  they  of  course  with  each  other.  In 
Lev.  18.  14,  the  phrase  '  to  uncover  the 
nakedness' is  explained  by  the  phrase 
*  to  approach  to  ;'  in  Lev.  20.  IL  by  the 
phrase  '  to  lie  with,'  and  in  Lev,  20.  21, 
by  the  phrase  '  to  lake.'  These  four 
phrases  then,  as  used  in  this  law,  have 
precisely  the  same  meaning.  And  if  it 
be  asked  how  far  that  meaning  extends, 
we  answer,  lo  every  kind  of  sexual  in- 
tercourse, but  especially  that  of  mar- 
riage. There  is  nothing  in  cither  of 
the  above  phrases  which  limits  its  ap- 
plication to  fornication  and  adultery 
rather  than  to  marriage  ;  and  the  gene- 
ral usage,  as  to  the  above  phrases  in  the 
Scriptures  abundantly  confirms  this  po- 
sition. '  To  uncover  the  nakedness'  is 
used  in  several  instances  (Lev.  18.  18, 
1  Sam.  20.  30,  Is.  57.  8),  to  denote  con- 
jugal  intercourse,  and  the  Heb.  Hpb 
luka'h,  to  fake,  when  connected  with 


nC3^  ishah,  woman,  or  used  absolutely, 
is  the  appropriate  term  for  to  marry  a 

wife. IT  To  any  that  is  near  of  kin 

to  him.     Heb.  I^irn  "".i^r:  '^2  bii  el  kol 
sheer  besaro,  to  all  (any)  remainder  of 
}  his  flesh,  implying  that  in  the  relations 
about  to  be  specified  the  parties  were, 
I  in  the  economy  of  heaven's  institution, 
I  so  intimately  united  or  rather  identified, 
j  that  the  one  was,  as  it  were,  ihe  remain- 
I  der  of  the  other.     In  this  case,  ihere- 
;  fore,  the  Most   High    lays    down   thi^ 
I  nearness  of  kin  as  the  foundation  of  all 
j  the   following    prohibitions,   and    then 
!  proceeds  to  state  and  determine,  by  his 
I  own  sovereign  authority,  between  whom 
j  that  nearness  of  kin  subsists.     In   the 
j  interpretation  of  what  follows  it  is  im- 
;  portant  to  bear  in  mind,  that  although 
these   prohibitions  are  principally  ad- 
dressed to  the  7«an, yet  they  are  equally 
binding  upon  ihe  woman,  who  stands  ia 
the  same  degree  of  relationship. 

Incest  forbidden  with  one^s  own  Mother. 
7.  The  nakedness  of  thy  father,  or 
the  nakedness  of  thy  mother.  Heb. 
m^^J  ervah,  from  n"l3'  drah,  to  be  made 
naked.  Gr,  acr^rifioavvrj,  shame,  uncome- 
liness.  The  particle  or  in  this  verse 
should  undoubtedly  be  rendered  '  even,' 
as  these  words  are  designed  lo  express 
a  principle  which  lies  at  the  foundation 
of  this  whole  system  of  marriage  laws: 
viz.,  that  husband  and  wife  are  put  for 
one  and  the  same  thing,  are  completely 
identified]  '  they  being  no  more  twain 
but  one  flesh.'  This  is  clear  from  what 
follows,  *  she  is  thy  mother;'  showing 
that  the  mother's  nakedness  only  is 
meant,  though  it  is  called  the  father's, 
as  in  Deut.  27.  20,  '  Cursed  be  he  that 
lieth  with  his  father's  wife  ;  because  he 
uncovereth  his  father's  skirl,'  i.  e.  his 
mother's.  The  nakedness  of  the  one 
th^^refore  is  the  nakedness  of  the  other  ; 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


1S7 


8  h  The  nakedness  of  thy  father's 

h  Gen.  49.4.  ch.  20.  11.  Deut.  22.  30, 
and  27.  20.  Ezek.  22.  10.  Amos  2.  7.  1  Cor. 
•5.  1. 

and  he  that  marries  his  wife's  brother's 
daughter  does  the  same  thing  as  if  he 
married  his  own  brother's  daughter. 
The  crime  of  Lot's  daughters  was  a 
transgression  of  the  precept  contained 
in  this  verse.  The  parallel  passage  in 
ch.  20.  II,  is,  '  The  man  that  lieth  with 
his  father's  wife  hath  uncovered  his  fa- 
ther's nakedness  ;  both  of  them  shall 
surely  be  put  to  death.'  The  Hebrew 
canonists  say  on  this  precept,  '  He  that 
lieih  with  his  mother,  and  she  his  fa- 
ther's wife,  is  doubly  guilty,  whether  it 
be  while  his  father  is  living  or  after  his 
death  ;  first,  for  that  she  is  his  mother, 
and  secondly,  that  she  is  his  father's 
wi  fe.' — Maiinonides  in  Ainsworth.  It 
is  to  be  remarked  also  that  the  Targum 
of  Jonathan  supposes  the  parallel  case 
of  the  woman  with  her  father  to  be  im- 
plied ; — •'  The  woman  siiall  not  lie  with 
her  father,  and  the  man  shall  not  lie 
with  his  mother.'  This  is  important, 
as  indicating  that  the  Jews  considered 
the  relations  of  the  same  degree  as  vir- 
tually included  in  each  of  these  pre- 
cepts. What  is  forbidden  to  men  is 
forbidden  also  to  women  standing  in  the 
same  relation,  though  the  former  only 
are  mentioned. 

According  to  the  above, 
A  Man  may  not  marry  his 

Mother, 

Daughter  :* 
Nor  a  Woman  her 

Son, 

Father. 

With  a  Step-mother. 
8.  The  nakedness  of  thy  fatherh  wife 
shall  thou  not  uncover.  This  case  dif- 
fers from  the  preceding  only  in  its  being 
designed  to  embrace  one's  step-mother, 
as  well  as  his  own  mother.  The  divine 
lawgiver  would,    by  the  most  minute 


wife  shalt  thou  not  uncover :  it  is 
thy  father's  nakedness. 


*  The  implied  cases  are  italicized. 


specification,  preclude  the  possibility 
of  mistake  in  regard  to  the  meaning  of 
a  statute  aimed  against  such  a  horrid 
impiety  as  a  man's  having  illicit  con- 
nexion with  his  mother.  It  was  the 
incest  here  forbidden  in  this  precept,  of 
which  Reuben  was  guilty  with  Bilhah, 
Gen.  35.  22,  and  Absalom  with  the 
wives  of  his  father  David,  2  Sam.  16. 
21 ,  22.  We  learn  also  from  the  apostle, 
1  Cor.  5.  1,  that  this  was  a  sin  held  in- 
famous by  the  very  heathen.  The  He- 
brew writers  speak  thus  on  this  subject : 
*  A  man's  father's  wife,  and  his  son's 
wife,  and  his  brother's  wife,  and  his 
father's  brother's  wife,  are  unlawful  for 
him  for  ever;  whether  they  be  of  the 
betrothed  or  the  married,  whether 
divorced  or  not  divorced,  whether  their 
husbands  be  alive  or  dead  ;  except  in 
the  case  of  the  brother's  wife  who  hath 
left  nq  child,  Deut.  25.  5.  If  he  lie 
with  any  of  them  while  her  husband  is 
alive,  he  is  doubly  guilty  ;  first,  in  re- 
spect that  she  is  of  his  near  kin,  and, 
secondly,   that   she    is   another  man's 

wife.'  —  Maimonides. IT    It    is    his 

father^s  nakedness.  That  is,  on  the 
principle  o{ constituted  identity  between 
the  parties,  as  explained  in  the  note  on 
the  preceding  verse.  This  principle  is 
recognized  again  in  like  manner  in  v.  14, 
where  the  uncovering  of  an  uncle's  na- 
kedness is  explained  as  the  '  approach- 
ing to  his  wife.' 

Results. 
A  Man  may  not  marry  his 

Step-mother, 

Step-daughter, 

Daughter-in-law, 

Mother-in-law: 
Nor  a  Woman  her 

Step-son, 

Step-father, 

Father-in-law, 

Son-in-law. 


188 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


9  » The  nakedness  of  thy  sister, 
the  daughter  of  thy  father,  or 
daughter  of  iliy  mother,  whelher 
she  be  born  at  home,  or  born  abroad, 
even  their  nakedness  thou  shalt  not 
uncover. 

10  The  nakedness  of  thy   son's 

i  ch.  20.  17.     2  Sam.  13.  12.     Ezek.  2-2.  11. 


With  a  Sister. 
9.  The  nakedTiess  of  thy  sister,  &c. — 
u-hether  she  be  born  at  home,  or  born 
abroad.  Heb.  rn^1?2  lit  tT^n  m^1?3 
yin  moledeth  bayith  a  moledeth  hutz, 
the  birth  or  offspring  of  the  house,  or  the 
birth  or  offspring  (from)  abroad.  Chal. 
*  Which  is  begotten  by  the  father,  of 
another  wonnan,  or  by  the  mother,  of 
another  man.'  So  Targ.  Jon.  '  Whom 
thy  father  hath  begotten  of  another 
woman  or  of  thy  mother  ;  or  whom  thy  j 
mother  hath  borne  by  thy  father  or  by  : 
another  man.'  The  scope  of  the  pre- 
cept undoubtedly  is  to  forbid  connexion 
between  a  brother  and  sister,  whether 
such  sister  were  born  in  lawful  wedlock 
or  out  of  it.  The  penalty  annexed  to 
this  particular  form  of  incest  is  thus 
stated,  ch.  20.  17:  '  And  if  a  man  shall 
take  his  sister,  his  father's  daughter,  or 
his  mother's  daughter,  and  see  her  na- 
kedness, and  she  see  his  nakedness:  it 
is  a  wicked  thing  ;  and  they  shall  be 
cut  off  in  the  sight  of  their  ])eople  :  he 
hath  uncovered  his  sister's  nakedness ; 
he  shall  bear  his  iniquity.' 
Results. 

A  Man  may  not  marry  his 
Sister : 

Nor  a  Woman  her 
Brother. 

With  a  Grand-daughter. 
10.  The  nakedness  of  thy  son's  daugh- 
ter, &c.  The  connexion  forbidden  is 
too  express  to  need  any  particular  ex- 
planation. We  may  quote,  however, 
the  remark  of  Maimonides  in  respect  to 
it ; — '  Whoso  companieth  with  a  woman 
(even)  by  way  of  fornication,  and  be- 


daughter,  or  of  thy  daughter's 
daughter,  even  their  nakedness  thou 
shalt  not  uncover:  for  theirs  is  thine 
own  nakedness. 

11  The  nakedness  of  thy  father's 
wife's  daughter,  begotten  of  thy 
father,  (shew  thy  sister)  thou  shalt 
not  uncover  her  nakedness. 


getteth  a  daughter  of  her,  that  daughter 
is  forbidden  to  him  in  the  name  of  his 
daughter.  And  though  it  be  not  said  in 
the  law.  Thou  shall  not  uncover  thy 
daughter's  nakedness,  yet  this  is  be- 
cause it  forbiddeth  the  daughter's  daugh- 
ter ;  therefore  it  keepeth  silence  con- 
cerning the  daughter,  which  yet  is  for- 
bidden by  the  law  (i.  e.  by  the  spirit  of 
the  law),  and  not  by  the  scribes  only.' 
Other  Rabbinical  writers  hold  the  same 
language.  They  say  that  incest  with  a 
man's  own  daughter  is  not  prohibited, 
because  it  would  be  irresistibly  inferred. 
If  a  grand-daughter,  standing  in  a  de- 
gree more  remote  from  him,  is  forbid- 
den to  his  approach,  surely  his  own 
daughter  must  in  the  nature  of  the  case 
be  prohibited.  And  if  it  could  be  said 
of  a  sou's  or  daughter's  daughter, '  Her's 
is  thine  own  nakedness,'  how  much 
more  emphatically  could  it  be  said  of 
an  own  daughter? 

Results. 
A  Man  may  not  marry  his 

Grand-daughter, 

Grand-mother : 
Nor  a  Woman  her 

Grand-father, 

Grand-son. 

With  a  Half-sister  by  the  Father^s  side. 
11.  The  nakedness  of  thy  father^s 
wife'' s  daughter,  begotten  of  thy  father. 
Heb.  '^'^Zit  rnbl?3  moledeth  abika,  the 
birth,  generation,  or  offspring  of  thy 
father,  the  same  word  as  that  rendered 
*  born,'  in  v.  9.  It  is  by  no  means  an 
easy  matter  to  determine  the  precise 
point  of  difference  between  the  prohi 
bition  in  this  verse  and  that  in  v.  9 
Perhaps  we  can  hit  upon  no  construction 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


189 


12  ^  Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the 
nakedness  of  thy  father's  sister : 
she  is  thy  father's  near  kinswoman. 

13  Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the 
nakedness  of  thy  mother's  sister  : 

K  ch.  20.  19. 

n- arer  the  iruih  than  ihe  following  : — 
'1  h<'  9tlivcr.se  cftniains  a  general  pre- 
ff'pt  forbidding  a  man  to  marry  his  sis- 
ter, either  '  the  daughter  of  his  father 
burn  a!  home,'  i.  e.  his  sister-gerir.an,or 
fill  sister,  by  fallier  or  mother ;  or  '  the 
daughter  of  his  mother,  born  abroad;' 
i.  e.  his  half-sister  by  the  mother's  side, 
and  by  another  father.  In  the  llth 
Verse  a  man  is  forbidden  to  marry  a 
half-sister  by  his  father's  side.  The 
Gr.  understands  by  the  sister  here  men- 
"tioned,  aoeXbr]  bjo-arpia,  a  sister  by  the 
same  father,  and  with  this  the  Chal. 
agrees.  After  all  we  must  leave  the 
matter  involved  in  a  considerable  de- 
gree of  obscurity,  as  does  Michaelis, 
Vv'lio  suggests  that  it  Tnay  perhaps  be 
intended  as  an  illustration  of  v.  9,  and 
that  it  was  inserted  with  a  view  to  de- 
scribe the  marriage  in  which  Abraham 
lived  in  different  words,  and  to  prohibit 
it  a  second  lime,  lest,  by  reference  to 
Abraham's  example,  the  first  statute 
should  have  been  falsely  explained. 
For  the  Results  see  under  v.  9.  The 
two  passages  together  forbid  marriage 
between  a  brother  and  a  sister,  both  of 
the  whole  and  the  half-blood. 

With  a  Paternal  Aunt. 
12  Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the  naked- 
ness of  thy  father's  sister.  Whether 
we  are  to  understand  here  the  full  sis- 
ter only  or  the  half  sister  also,  is  a 
matter  left  undecided.  By  the  Jewish 
commentators,  both  are  held  to  be  in- 
cluded, and  they  maintain  also  that  it 
made  no  difference  whether  she  were 
legitimately  or  illegitimately  begotten 
by  his  grandfather.  Selden  informs  us 
that  such  marriages  were  prohibited  by 
the  ancient  Romans,  although  it  would 
seem  that,  previous  to  the  Mosaic  law. 


for  she  is  thy  mother's  near  kins- 
woman. 

14  iThou  shalt  not  uncover  the 
nakedness  of  thy  father's  brother, 
thou  shalt  not  approach  to  his  wife : 
she  is  thine  aunt. 

1  ch.  20.  20. 


they  were  at  least  occasionally  practised 
by  the  Hebrew  nation,  for  it  is  generally 
admitted  that  Moses  himself  was  the 
offspring  of  this  very  connexion  between 
his  father  Amram  and  his  aunt  Joche- 

bed,  Ex.  6.  20. ^  She  is  thy  father's 

hear  kinswoman.  Heb.  Jj^ln  'l'^3i<  ^t^'iZJ 
sheer  abika  hi,  she  is  thy  father's  re- 
mainder. Gr.  oiKEia  yap  varpos  cov  ecri, 
she  is  the  domestic  (relation)  of  thy 
father.  So  near,  that  as  he  could  not 
be  permitted  to  marry  her,  so  the  like 
interdict  was  laid  upon  his  son  also, 
who  was  but  little  further  removed. 
And  for  the  same  reason  that  a  man 
could  not  lawfully  marry  his  aunt,  it 
seems  also  to  follow  that  he  could  not 
marry  his  niece — a  principle  of  inter- 
pretation on  the  justness  of  which  we 
have  already  remarked. 

Results. 
A  Man  may  not  marry  his 

Aunt, 

Niece : 
Nor  a  Woman  her 

Nephew, 

Uncle. 

With  a  Maternal  Aunt. 

13.  Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the  na- 
kedness of  thy  mother's  sister.  For  this 
the  reason  is  the  same  as  for  the  former 
prohibition ;  the  aunt  by  the  mother's 
side  being  as  near  as  the  aunt  by  the 

father's. IF  She  is  thy  mother's  near 

kinswoman.  Heb.  fc^lH  yz}^  "liitZ:  sheer 
immeka  hi,  she  is  thy  mother's  remain' 

der,     Gr.    oiKCia  yap  fjrirpos  aov  cari^  she 

is  the  domestic  (relation)  of  thy  mother. 

Results. 

Same  as  under  preceding  verse. 

With  a  Paternal  Uncle's  Wife. 

14.  Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the  na- 


m 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


nch.20.  21. 
Matt.  22.  24. 


Matt.  14.  4. 
Mark  12.19. 


See  Deut  25.  5. 


15  mThou  shalt  not  uncover  the  i  l6  n  Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the 
nakedness  of  thy  daaghter-in-law  :  I  nakedness  of  thy  brother's  wife: 
she  is  thy  son's  wife,  thou  shall  not  I  it  is  thy  brother's  nakedness, 
uncover  her  nakedness. 

m  Gen.  38.  IS.  26.    ch.  20.  12.    Ezek.  22.  11, 

kedness  of  thy  father^s  brother.  That 
is,  as  appears  from  what  follows,  of  thy 
failier's  brother's  u-ife  ;  called  his  na- 
kcduess,  because  man  and  wife  are  con- 
sidered and  termed  *  one  flesh.'  See 
Note  on  v.  8.  By  parity  of  reasoning, 
it  is  to  be  inferred,  that  the  uncle  was 
precluded  from  marrying  his  brother's 
daughter.  The  Hebrew  canonists  also 
maintain  that  although  the  father's 
brother's  wife  only  is  mentioned,  yet 
the  prohibition  fairly  embraces  the  mo- 
ther's brother's  wife  in  like  manner. 

IT  Thou  shalt  not  approach.    Heb. 

!2'1pn  fc^i  to  tikrdb.     Gr.  ovk  eiaeXcvar], 
thou  shalt  not  go  in  unto  ;  i.  e.  have 
carnal  connexion  with. 
Results. 
A  Man  may  not  marry  his 

Uncle's  Wife, 

Wife's  Niece, 

Nephew's  Wife, 

Wife's  Aunt. 
Nor  a  Woman  her 

Husband's  Nephew, 

Aunt's  Husband, 

Husband's  Uncle, 

Niece's  Husband. 

With  a  Daughter -in-law. 
15.  Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the  na- 
kedness of  thy  daughter-in-law.  The 
Heb.  n^S  kallCih  is  in  several  instances 
elsewhere  used  to  signify  a  spouse  or 
bride,  and  it  is  here  rendered  by  the  Gr. 
vvfj<pr]^  of  the  same  signification.  But 
the  next  clause  makes  it  clear  that 
*  son's  wife '  is  meant,  on  which  relation 
see  Note  on  v.  8.  It  mattered  not,  ac- 
cording to  the  Rabbins,  whether  she 
had  been  fully  married  to  the  son,  or 
only  espoused  ;  or  whether  she  had 
been  married,  and  been  afterwards  di- 
vorced. Under  any  circumstances,  she 
was  unlawful  to  him.    The  prohibition 


with  the  penalty  is  thus  repeated,  Lev. 
20. 12, '  And  if  a  man  lie  with  his  daugh- 
ter-in-law, both  of  them  shall  surely  be 
put  to  death:  they  have  wrought  con- 
fusion J  their  blood  shall  be  upon  them.' 
Results. 
See  under  v.  8. 

With  a  Brother's  Wife. 

16.  Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the  na- 
kedness of  thy  brother's  wife.  This 
prohibition  is  repeated  ch.  20.  21,  with 
the  annexed  penalty  as  follows,  '  And 
if  a  man  shall  take  his  brother's  wife, 
it  is  an  unclean  thing:  he  hath  uncov- 
ered his  brother's  nakedness  ;  they  shall 
be  childless.'  This  law  is  of  course  to 
be  understood  with  the  exception,  that 
if  the  deceased  brother  died  childless, 
it  was  not  only  lawful  for  the  surviving 
brother  to  znarrry  the  widow,  but  he 
was  obliged  to  do  it,  or  incur  the  penalty 
of  being  publicly  disgraced  in  the  eyes 
of  all  Israel,  Deut.  25.  5-10. 

The  consideration  of  the  present  pre- 
cept becomes,  as  is  well  known,  ex- 
tremely important,  from  its  connexion 
with  the  question  respecting  the  lawful- 
ness of  marriage  with  a  deceased  wife's 
sister.  The  leading  principles  involved 
in  the  discussion  of  this  subject  have 
been  already  adverted  to  in  our  prefatory 
remarks,  and  the  general  result  to 
which  we  hove  been  brought  stated. 
The  parallel  marriage,  it  is  certain,  is 
not  forbidden  in  so  many  terms  ;  neither 
is  it  expressly  forbidden  that  a  man  shall 
marry  his  own  daughter  or  his  grand- 
mother. But  who  will  deny  that  a  man 
in  doing  this  would  be  sinning  against 
God,  or,  in  other  words,  acting  contrary 
to  the  divine  will?  The  decision  of 
the  question  evidently  rests  on  the  truth 
or  falsity  of  the  position,  that  the  pre- 
cept expressly  naming  and  prohibiting 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


191 


17  o 


Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the    nakedness  of  a  woman  and   her 
daughter,  neither  shalt  thou  take 


o  ch.  20.  14. 


any  particular  degree  of  relation  must 
be  llIuler^lood  lo  comprise  all  relations 
wiiliin  tlie  same  degree.  In  the  present 
ca^e  the  prdhibitioii,  v.  16,  against  mar- 
ry iiig  a  brollier's  wife,  is-  founded  solely 
on  I  he  relation  existing  between  the 
parties;  and  as  the  relation  in  the  sup- 
posf-d  case  is  precisely  the  same,  with 
tlie  exception  only  of  the  change  of  the 
sex,  it  is  not  easy  to  conceive  what  rea- 
son shall  be  assigned  why  the  one  is 
not  equally  forbidden  with  the  other. 

It  is  indeed  affirmed,  that  as  this  law 
is  subject  to  the  exception  mentioned 
Deul.25.  o-lO,  'If  brethren  dwell  to- 
gether, and  one  of  tliem  die,  and  have 
no  child,  the  wife  of  the  dead  shall  not 
marry  without  unto  a  stranger  ;  her 
husband's  brother  shall  go  in  unto  her, 
and  take  her  to  him  to  wife,'  &c. ;  there- 
fore this  enactment  virtually  rescinds 
the  whole  precept  against  marrying  a 
sister-in  law.  But  to  this  it  may  be  re- 
plield,  that  an  exception  to  a  general 
law,  or  a  proviso  in  a  particular  case,  is 
never  considered  as  a  repeal  of  the  law, 
but  a  confirmation  of  it  in  all  other 
cases  in  which  there  is  no  exception  nor 
proviso.  They  are  only  a  suspension 
of  the  law  in  the  particular  cases  spe- 
cified, and  cannot  extend  to  other  cases, 
much  less  to  the  whole  law  to  which 
they  relate.  The  statute  in  Deut.  25, 
is  not  intended  to  ascertain  the  degrees 
of  kindred  within  which  marriages  aTe 
prohibited  ;  this  is  unequivocally  done 
in  the  chapter  before  us.  The  only 
object  of  the  exception  is  expressly 
mentioned.  A  brother  is  directed  to 
marry  the  widow  of  his  deceased  bro- 
ther in  a  certain  emergency.  The  bro- 
ther must  have  died  without  male  issue. 
Had  the  deceased  left  a  son,  the  gene- 
ral law  of  incest  would  have  rendered  a 
marriage  with  his  widow  as  incestuous 
as  with  any  other  woman  near  of  kin. 
The  exception  was  evidently  local  in 
Its  nature,  and  restricted   to  the  the- 


ocracy.   It  was  enacted  for  the  express 
purpose  of  preserving  families  and  in- 
heritances unbroken  until  the  Messiah 
came.     Whatever,  then,  might  be   the 
scope  or  operation  of  the  exception,  it 
must  necessarily  expire  with   the  llie- 
ocracy,  leaving  the  moral  part  of  the 
i  precept  in  its  full  force.     But  the  Le- 
1  vitical  code  has  long  since  answered  its 
j  ends,  and  is  abolished.     This  particular 
feature  of  the  law  is  therefore  no  longer 
binding  ;    nor  is  a  similar   case  at  all 
possible    under    the    New    Testament. 
T  Consequently  it  does  not  appear  that 
any  sanction  can  be  adduced  from  this 
!  law  for  the  marriage  in  question.    Chris- 
1  lians  would   seem  lo   be  imperatively 
'  barred  from   marrying  a  sister-in-law, 
who  has  been  the  wife  of  a  deceased  bro- 
ther, and  still  more  a  sister-in-law  who 
is  the  sister  of  a  deceased  wife,  lo  whom 
the  exception  in  Deut.  never  did,  and  iu 
the  nature  of  things  never  could  apply. 
The  conclusion,  therefore,  would  seem 
to  be  unavoidable,  that  there  is  nothing 
in  the  law  of  Deut.  25.  which  invali- 
dates the  moral  nature  and   perpetual 
obligation  of  the  law  forbidding  mar- 
riage with  a  deceased  wife's  sister — 
nothing  which  in  any  form  or  degree 
can  be  binding  upon  Christians  under 
the  New  Testament  dispensation — and 
nothing  in  the  letter  or  spirit  of  that 
precept  which  has  the  least  reference  to 
the  question  before  us. 
Results. 
A  Man  may  not  marry  his 
Brother's  wife, 
Wife's  sister : 
Nor  a  Woman  her 
Husband's  brother, 
Sister's  husband. 

With    a   Step-Daughter  or    a   Grand- 
daughter. 
17.  Thou  shalt  not  uncover  the  na- 
ked  ness  of  a  woman  and  her  daughter. 
!  Heb.   r>T.'2''>   nri*   rn^5    ervath  ishah 


192 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


her  son's  daughter,  or  her  daugh- 
ter's daughter,  to  uncover  her  na- 
kedness :  for  they  are  her  near 
kinswomen  :  it  is  wickedness. 


v-bittah.  The  phraseology  here  is  pe- 
culiiir,  and  would  seem  at  first  blush  to 
fiMl)i(l  a  particular  form  of  polygamy, 
'•r  perhaps  some  single  incestuous  act. 
(ndeed  we  are  not  prepared  to  say  that 
this  may  not  be  intended.  It  may  pos- 
sibly have  been  designed  to  inspire  a 
horror  of  conjoint  cohabitation  with 
mother  and  daughter  at  the  same  time. 
But  an  equally  just  sense  undoubtedly 
is,  that  one  was  not  at  liberty,  upon  the 
death  of  his  wife,  to  marry  her  daugh- 
ter (not  his  own),  and  as  a  mother  and 
daughter  are  'remainder  of  fiesh '  to 
each  other,  the  marrying  of  the  daugh- 
ter, even  after  the  death  of  the  mother, 
was  a  species  of  marrying  both  at  once, 
and  therefore  the  copulative  *  and '  is 
employed — '  a  woman  and  her  daugh- 
ter.' Upon  this  class  of  connexions, 
Maimonides  writes  thus  ; — '  When  a 
man  niarrieth  a  woman,  there  are  six 
women  of  her  kin  unlawful  to  him  for- 
ever, whether  his  wife  live  with  him  or 
be  divorced  ;  whether  she  be  alive  or 
dead  :  and  they  are  these — her  mother, 
and  her  mother's  mother,  and  her  fa- 
ther's mother,  and  her  daughter,  and  her 
daughter's  daughter,  and  her  son's 
daughter.  And  if  he  he  with  any  of 
these  while  his  wife  liveth.  both  of  them 
are  to  be  burned.' — Ainsworth.  The 
punishment  of  burning  in  such  a  case  is 
expressly  enacted,  ch.  20.  14,  where  it 
will  be  observed  that  the  original  word 
here  rendered  '  woman,'  is  there  ren- 
dered '  wife.'  '  And  if  a  man  take  a 
wife  and  her  mother,  it  is  wickedness  : 
they  shall  be  burnt  with  fire,  both  he 
and  they :  that  there  be  no  wdckedness 

among    you.' ^  It    is    wickedness. 

Heb.  54in  n>2t  zimmdh  hi.  The  origi- 
nal word  is  highly  emphatic,  denoting 
properly  nefarious  wickedness.  It  is 
*  deed  defined  in  the  Lexicons  to  sig- 


18  Neither  shall  thou  take  a  wife 
to  her  sister,  p  to  vex  her,  to  un- 
cover her  nakedness,  besides  the 
other,  in  her  life-time. 

P  1  Sam.  1.  6,  3. 

nify  thought  or  purpose,  but  the  import 
is  that  of  thought  or  counsel  of  an  atro- 
cious character  involving  some  signal 
enormity.    The  Gr.  has  for  it  aa-efSrjjxa, 
an  impiety,  an  act  of  gross  ungodliness, 
from  which  God  would  have  his  people 
shrink  back  with  horror. 
Results. 
A  Man  may  not  marry  his 
Step-daughter, 
Wile's  grand-daughter: 
Nor  a  Woman  her 
Step-son, 
Husband's  grand-son. 

With  a  Wife's  Sister. 
IS.  Neither  shall  thou  take  a  wife  to 
I  her  sister,  to  vex  her,  &c.  A  passage 
j  of  great  difficulty,  and  yet  of  great  im- 
portance in  its  bearing  on  the  question 
of  marriage  with  a  deceased  wife's  sis- 
ter, which  we  have  made  so  prominent 
in  our  previous  annotations.  It  is  well 
known  that  the  advocates  of  such  mar- 
riages contend  that  this  verse,  by  ne- 
cessary implication  (which  in  this  case 
it  seems  they  readily  admit,  though  re- 
jecting it  in  every  other),  contains  an 
unequivocal  intimation  of  their  lawful- 
ness, as  they  construe  the  precept  thus : 
'  Thou  shall  not  take  another  wife,  who 
is  the  sister  of  thy  first  wife,  to  vex  her, 
to  uncover  her  nakedness  beside  the 
other,  in  her  life  time ;  although  thou 
mayest  take  such  a  sister  for  a  wife 
after  the  death  of  thy  first  wife.'  As 
this  construction  completely  overthrows 
the  force  of  all  the  reasonings  adduced 
on  the  other  side,  it  demands  a  very 
rigid  exammation  ;  and  upon  this  we 
enter  by  adverting  to  the  form  of  ex- 
pression in  the  original.  A  hint  of 
this  is  given  to  the  English  reader  by 
the  marginal  rendering — '  one  wife  to 
another,'  for  which   many  contend  as 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


193 


the  only  true  version.  The  Heb.  has 
npn  J<^  nnni*  ^14  nCS^  ishah  el  a'hothdh 
lo  tikkah,  a  wife,  or  woman,  to  her  sis- 
ter thou  shalt  not  take.  As  to  the 
siieaning  of  ihe  separate  terms  there  is 
no  doubt.  It  is  admitted  on  all  sides 
that  r\'2^^  ishah  means  'woman'  or 
'  wile,'  ii^  el,  to,  and  nnrii^  a'hothdh, 
sister.  But  it  is  not  clear  what  the 
words  import  when  taken  altogether, 
us  we  tiad  the  phrase  nrin5<  ^ii^  r\'C^ 
ishah  el  a.'hoth(ih  used  idiomatically  to 
Mainly  llie  adding  of  one  thing  to  ano- 
ther,na  is  also  the  corresponding  phrase 
T^n'A  bit  1L;&%  ish  el  a^hiv,  a  man  to  his 
brother.  01"  these  phrases  the  former — 
'  a  man  lo  his  brother ' — occurs  twenty- 
Jive  limes  in  the  Hebrew  scriptures, 
*Mid  tlie  latter — '  a  woman  to  her  sister' 
— ten  times.  Neither  of  the  phrases 
are  conliiied  to  persons  ;  ihey  are  both 
frequently,  and  iu  fact  generally,  spoken 
of  inanimate  substances  as  will  appear 
from  ihe  citations  which  we  give,  in- 
cluding all  the  important  instances. 

(1.)  1^ni<  ^S^  113^5^ 
A  man  to  his  brother. 

Gen.  37.  19,  '  And  they  said  one  to 
another,  (liriit  ^5t  ID'^it  a  man  to  his 
brother).' 

Ex.  25.  20,  '  And  the  faces  of  the 
cherubim  shall  look  one  to  another 
(l^riit  iit  II3"'l!%  a  man  to  his  brother.)' 

Ex.  37.  9,  '  The  cherubim  stood  with 
their  faces  one  to  another  (^J^  D'^Jt 
Tini<  a  man  to  his  brother).^ 

Jer.  13.  14,  'And  I  will  dash  them 
one  against  another  (1%1J<  ^j^  ^a'^j^  a 
man  to  his  brother).^ 

Jer.  25  26,  '  And  all  the  kings  of  the 
north  one  with  another  (T^Hit  ^5%  ID^^it 
a  man  to  his  brother).' 

Ezek.  24.  23,  '  And  mourn  one  towards 
another  (T^nst  ^it  ID^it  a  man  to  his 
brother).' 

In  addition  to  the  above  we  find,  in 
the  masculine  form,  several  equivalent 
modes  of  expression  slightly  varying 
from  that  now  given  ;  as  T^HJ*  tlSt  C^fit 
ish  eth  a'hiv,  a  man  his  brother,  i.  e. 
17 


one  another ;  I'lnjti  :a^Jt  ish  kea'hiv, 
a  man  as  his  brother,!,  e.  one  man  as 
another  ;  1"init1  ^">J<  ish  veu'hiv,  a  man 
and  his  brother,  i.  e.  one  man  with 
another ;  "lini<?3  'tlJ^it  ish  meu'hiv,  a 
man  from  his  brother,  i.  e.  one  man 
from  another  J  I'^nst  ^"'it  ish  d'hiv,  a 
man  his  brother,  i.  e.  one  man  another  ; 
1"iriii  "^^^2  ffi"'i5  ish  mial  d'hiv,  a  man 
from  his  brother,  i.  e.  one  from  another  , 
I'Tlit^  113"iit  ish  led'hiv,  a  man  to  his 
brother,  i.  e.  one  to  another.  The  usage 
in  these  cases  is  too  obvious  to  need 
remark  ;  but  we  are  more  especially 
concerned  with  the  feminine  form, 
which  we  now  proceed  to  illustrate. 

(2.)  nrnsij  ^jt  r:::^ 

A  Woman  to  her  Sister. 

Ex.  26.  3,  '  The  five  curtains  shall 
be  coupled  together  one  to  another 
nrnx  pit  niL"it  a  woman  to  her  sister), 
and  other  five  curtains  shall  be  coupled 
one  to  another  (ntT\^  ^it  lltl^it  a  wo- 
man to  her  sister).' 

Ex.  26.  5, '  That  the  loops  may  take 
hold  one  of  another  (nnHit  ^Jt  niUit  a 
woman  to  her  sister).' 

Ex.  2Q.  6.  '  And  couple  the  curtains 
together  (nnriit  iit  ilTmHt.  a  woman  to 
her  sister).' 

Ex.  26.  17.  '  Two  tenons  shall  be  set 
one  against  another  (nnriit  ^it  nc&t  a 
woman  to  her  sister).' 

Ezek.  1.9,  and  11.  '  Their  wings  were 
joined  one  to  another  (nriHit  ^fi<  H^Jit 
a  woman  to  her  sister).' 

Ezek.  1.23,  '  And  their  wings  were 
straight  one  towards  another  (H^iJi^ 
nnriit  ):it  a  woman  to  her  sister) .' 

Ezek.  3.  10,  '  The  wings  of  the  living 
creatures  touched  one  another  (tlffiit 
nnnit  ^it  a  woman  to  her  sister).' 

These  are  all  the  instances,  except 
the  present,  where  the  phrase  niUi^ 
nriHit  ^it  a  wife  to  her  sister  occurs, 
and  it  will  be  observed  that  in  every 
one,  except  the  case  before  us,  the  ren- 
dering in  our  translation  is  one  to  ano- 
ther,  together,  or  some  phraseology 
wholly  equivalent.      In  no  other  in- 


194 


LEVITICUS.  [B.  C.  1490. 


stance  do  we  meet  with  the  literal  ver- 
sion, a  wife  or  woman  to  her  sister.  So 
in  the  twenty-five  instances  of  the  mas- 
culine Ibrni,  the  rendering  of  our  trans- 
lators  is  uniform,  one  to  another,  whe- 
ther spoken  of  persons  or  things.  In 
no  case  do  we  find  any  reference  to 
relationship  by  blood.  The  question 
therefore  arises  whether  the  literal  ver- 
sion in  this  place,  involving,  as  it  does, 
a  departure  from  common  usage,  is 
warranted.  It  is  admitted  that  the 
thirly-four  indisputable  cases  in  which 
this  mode  of  speech  occurs  in  an  idio' 
malic  sense  go  very  far  to  establish  this 
as  in  all  cases  the  genuine  significa- 
tion of  the  phrase.  It  would  seem,  al 
first  view,  that  such  an  overwhelming 
majority  of  instances  would  be  com- 
pletely decisive  of  the  point  in  dispute  ; 
and  yet  we  cannot  but  concede  that 
there  is  in  this  one  case  very  great  rea- 
son to  doubt.  For  it  will  be  observed 
that  in  every  other  instance,  not  only 
are  the  things  which  are  to  be  added  to 
each  other  inanimate  objects  of  the 
feminine  gender,  but  the  subject  of  dis- 
course is  first  mentioned,  and  by  that 
is  the  import  of  the  phrase  governed. 
If  we  take  the  expression  here  accord- 
ing to  its  import  in  every  other  case  in 
which  it  occurs,  we  shall  be  obliged  to 
render  the  verse,  '  Thou  shalt  not  take 
one  to  another  to  vex,'  &c.  One  what  ? 
— it  might  properly  be  asked.  If  it  be 
said,  one  woman,  this  is  immediately 
giving  a  new  latitude  to  the  phrase  be- 
yond what  it  idiomatically  implies ; 
and  yet  its  force  as  an  idiom  is  all  that 
IS  relied  upon  in  proof  of  its  referring 
not  to  a  sister,  but  to  any  other  woman. 
The  principles  then  of  a  fair  exegesis 
would  seem  to  compel  us,  if  we  under- 
stand woman  or  wife  by  nrst  ishah,  to 
understand  sister  by  rUTl^  a^hothah. 
Again,  it  appears  that  m  every  other 
case  the  phrase  has  a  reciprocal  import  • 
that  is,  a  number  of  things  are  said  to  be 
so  and  so  one  to  another.  But  here  we 
perceive  nothing  of  this.  There  is  no 
trace  of  mutual,  reciprocal  action  or 


relation.  It  is  simply  taking  one  ob- 
ject in  addition  to  another,  and  leaving 
the  whole  phraseology  utterly  imperfect 
as  compared  with  the  Hebrew  usage. 

We  cannot  but  think,  therefore,  that 
'  a  wife  to  her  sister'  is  the  appropriate 
rendering  in  this  place  ;  and  it  is  not  a 
matter  of  small  weight  in  confirmation, 
that  all  the  ancient  versions,  as  the 
Chal.  Targ.  of  Onkelos,  the  Samaritan, 
the  Syriac,  and  the  Arabic,  adhere  to 
the  literal  construction.  The  Greek 
of  the  Seventy  also,  which  elsewhere 
renders  the  Heb.  phrase  by  one  to  ano- 
ther, here  has  ywatHa  £77'  aStXiprj  ov  X'ji/'/?, 
a  woman  to  her  sister  thou  shalt  not 
take.  At  the  same  time,  the  advocate 
for  the  idiomatic  interpretation  has  a 
right  to  demand  a  probable  reason  for 
the  change  of  diction  observable  in  this 
verse,  when  compared  with  the  preced- 
ing. Why  does  it  not  commence  with  the 
formula  H^n  nd  i^lrm^l  UTLHi.  tTinS' 
ervath  eshah  ved'hothah  lo  tegalleh,  the 
nakedness  of  a  wife  and  her  sister  thou 
shalt  not  uncover  ?  To  this  it  is  per- 
haps a  satisfactory  answer,  that  the 
writer  wished  to  introduce  the  terms  for 
'  uncovering  nakedness  '  in  a  little  dif- 
ferent relation  in  the  subsequent  part 
of  the  verse,  and  so  to  connect  them 
with  other  words  as  to  form  a  strong 
dissuasive  against  the  union  forbidden. 
On  reading  the  verse  entire  we  should 
doubtless  find  it  extremely  difficult  to 
hit  upon  any  mode  of  expression  so 
well  adapted  to  convey  the  sense  in- 
tended as  that  which  actually  occurs, 
and  this  is  what  necessitated  a  depart- 
ure from  the  fixed  phraseology  that  runs 
through  the  other  precepts,  because  we 
have  here  not  the  precept  only,  but  an 
argument  to  enforce  it — an  argument 
drawn  from  the  effects  of  such  a  mar- 
riage upon  domestic  happiness.  The 
lawgiver,  in  the  other  verses,  speaks  for 
the  most  part  the  language  of  simple 
absolute  authority  ;  in  this  he  hints  at  a 
reason  for  his  command.  We  might 
expect,  therefore,  a  slight  change  inlhe 
form  of  speech. 


B.  C.  1490.J 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


195 


But  al  though  we  feel  constrained  to 
give  up  the  argument  drawn  from  the 
Hebrew  id7'om,andusually  applied  in  this 
connexion  to  convert  the  passage  before 
us  into  a  direct  prohibition  of  polygamy, 
and  therefore  as  having  nothing  to  do 
with  the  question  of  the  disputed  mar- 
riage ;  and  though  we  cannot  in  fair- 
ness avoid  admitting  that  tiie  connexion 
here  forbidden  is  marriage  with  a  wife^s 
sister  ;  yet  we  do  not  for  that  reason  feel 
hiid  under  any  necessity  of  admitting 
the  iiilerence  which  is  so  coninionly 
drawn  Irom  the  final  clause  of  the  verse. 
'  Neiih.er  shalt  thou  take  a  wife  to  her 
lister,  to  vex  her,  to  uncover  her  naked- 
ness, besides  the  oilier  in  her  life-time.'' 
From  liiis,  it  is  said,  the  implication  is 
palpable,  that  the  obligation  of  the  law 
is  limited  by  the  life  time  of  the  first 
wife,  and  that  upon  her  decease  there  is 
no  bar  to  the  husband's  marrying  her 
^^isler.  This  we  must  regard  as  a  gross 
noil  sequitur.  The  expression  '  in  her 
life  time  '  is  too  slight  to  be  allowed  to 
vacate  the  Ibrce  of  all  the  considerations 
which  we  have  before  adduced  in  proof 
of  the  implied  prohibitions  contained 
in  the  preceding  verses.  If  the  infer- 
ence which  we  have  shown  to  be  dedu- 
cible  from  v.  16  be  intrinsically  sound, 
it  cannot  be  set  aside  by  any  expression 
in  the  verse  before  us  ;  for  there  is  no- 
thing here  more  certain  than  we  have 
found  above.  At  the  very  utmost  it  is 
merely  setting  one  inference  against 
another.  The  genuine  import  of  the 
phrase  *  in  her  life  time '  in  this  con- 
nexion undoubtedly  is,  as  long  as  she 
/iffs,  without  the  least  implication  of 
any  thing  that  is  to  follow,  or  that  may 
follow.  You  are  not  to  take  a  step 
which  will  be  sure  to  embitter  the  lot 
of  the  first  wife  during  the  whole  pe- 
riod of  her  life.  The  consequence  of 
your  rashness,  or  indiscretion,  or  ma- 
levolence, will  be,  that  she  will  know 
peace  no  more  as  long  as  she  lives. 

But  what,  it  may  be  asked,  is  the  real 
scope  of  the  precept?  Is  it  a  direct 
and  categorical  prohibition  of  polyga- 


my? To  this  we  are  for  ourselves  con- 
strained to  answer.  No.  Although  po- 
lygamy was  essentially  contrary  to  the 
genius  of  the  marriage  institution,  and 
never  truly  sanctioned  by  the  Most 
High,  yet  it  was  evidently  tolerated, 
and  the  divine  legislation  not  only  re- 
cognized its  existence,  but  provided 
against  its  abuses.  If  the  text  in  ques- 
tion contains  a  positive  prohibition  of 
that  sin,  the  good  men  of  Israel  must 
have  known  it.  Whatever  ambiguity 
it  may  have  to  us,  it  could  have  none 
to  them  ;  and  can  it  be  supposed  that 
David,  for  instance,  knew  there  was 
such  a  law,  and  yet  spent  his  life  in 
open  violation  of  it?  'Again,'  says 
the  author  of  an  able  series  of  articles 
on  this  subject  in  the  N.  E.  Puritan, 
'  we  show  that  polygamy  is  not  prohib- 
ited in  this  text  by  a  plain  reductio  ad 
absurdum.  For  in  the  first  place,  if  that 
be  the  sin  forbidden,  it  is  a  sin  whose 
penalty  is  death.  For  after  completing 
the  series,  the  lawgiver  says,  *  Whoso- 
ever shall  commit  any  of  these  abomi- 
nations, even  the  souls  that  commit 
them,  shall  he  cut  off  from  among  the 
people.^  That  these  terms  import  pun- 
ishment by  death  is  indisputable.  Now 
suppose  the  crime  thus  threatened,  to 
have  been  that  of  marrying  two  wives. 
Then  we  have  the  absurdity  of  an  ex- 
press law  against  bigamy,  declaring 
that  bigamists  shall  be  punished  with 
death  ;  and  then  afterwards  a  law  re- 
quiring all  bigamists  to  make  a  fair  dis- 
posal of  their  estates  among  the  children 
of  their  two  wives.  For  in  Dent.  21.  15, 
we  read;  'If  a  man  have  two  wives, 
one  beloved  and  the  other  hated,  and 
they  have  borne  him  children,  both  the 
beloved  and  the  hated  ;  and  if  the  first- 
born be  hers  that  was  hated,  then  it 
shall  be,  when  he  maketh  his  sons  to 
inherit  that  which  he  hath,  that  he  may 
not  make  the  son  of  the  beloved  first, 
born  before  the  son  of  the  hated.'  Now 
this  is  a  strange  law  to  come  in  after  a 
law  that  had  denounced  death  on  any- 
one that  should  have  two  wives.    For 


196 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


if  the  first  Iliw  were  executed,  the  sec- 
ond would  be  superfluous.  The  second 
supposes  men  to  he  living  quietly  and 
rearing  families,  and  making  wills  at 
the  close  of  a  peaceful  life,  when  the 
previous  law  supposes  them  to  have 
died  malefactors.  It  involves  the  ab- 
Mudity  of  one  law  made  on  the  suppo- 
Miioi)  ihal  ihe  other  would  be  trampled 

II,  then,  polygamy  is  not  forbidden  in 
lliis  passage,  what  is?  We  answer, 
Ihal  11  was  designed  to  discountenance 
llie  practice  which  is  implied  in  the 
plain  and  literal  terms  of  the  text — the 
taking  simultaneously  of  two  sisters  to 
wife.  This  was  a  practice  which,  as  a 
general  fact,  would  be  attended  with 
mihappy  consequences  to  the  domestic 
relations  of  all  the  parlies  concerned. 
Reference  is  undoubtedly  to  be  had  all 
along  to  the  prevalent  sentiments  and 
usages  of  the  Oriental  nations.  It  is 
well  known  that  among  them  the  cus- 
tom of  having  more  than  one  w^ife  in  a 
single  household  is  very  apt  to  engender 
rivalries,  jealousies,  and  feuds  between 
those  who  share  the  divided  marital 
favors  and  alTections  of  their  common 
lord.  In  such  a  slate  of  things,  there 
was  something  peculiarly  repulsive  in 
the  spectacle  of  Iw'o  natural  sisters, 
who  ought  to  be  tenderly  bound  to  each 
other  by  the  ties  of  blood,  and  studious 
of  each  other's  happiness,  thrown  as  a 
matter  of  course  into  a  species  of  hos- 
tile attitude  one  towards  the  other,  and 
thus  proving  each  to  each  a  source  of 
continual  irritation  and  vexation.  Thus 
we  see  it  was  in  the  family  of  Jacob  ; 
and  it  is  highly  probable  that  as  in  one 
of  the  foregoing  precepts  there  was  a 
latent  allusion  to  the  case  of  Abraham, 
so  here  was  a  designed,  though  im- 
plicit, reference  to  that  of  Jacob.  The 
Most  High  would  so  frame  the  precept 
as  to  counteract  the  plea  of  patriarchal 
example  for  its  violation. 

But  all  inferences,  drawn  from  the 
phrase  '  in  her  life  time,'  as  if  that 
legitimated,  after  the  death  of  the  one 


sister,  a  marriage  which  was  forbidden 
before,  are  wholly  gratuitous.  Such 
an  implication  cannot  be  shown  to  have 
entered  at  all  into  the  drift  of  the  pre- 
cept. Its  genuine  purport  was  to  inti- 
mate that  the  vexation  created  by  such 
a  step  to  the  first  wife  would  last  as 
long  as  she  lived — that  there  would  be 
'  no  discharge  in  that  (domestic)  war.' 
And  with  a  very  malicious  or  evil- 
minded  man,  this  fact  might  of  itself 
be  in  some  cases  a  prompting  motive  tn 
such  a  union.  But  upon  all  such  con 
siderale  cruelty  as  this,  the  divine  pre 
cept  would  frown  in  advance. 

On  the  whole,  therefore,  we  are  una- 
ble to  perceive  that  ihe  precept  we  are 
now-  considering  has  any,  even  the  most 
remote,  relation  to  the  subject  of  inces- 
tuous marriages  treated  of  in  the  pre- 
ceding context.  The  whole  law  con- 
cerning incest  closes  with  the  17th 
verse.  The  prohibition  in  the  18th  re- 
spects altogether  another  subject,  and 
is  as  distinct  from  incest  as  any  of  ihe 
other  crimes  mentioned  and  forbidden 
in  the  remaining  parts  of  the  chapter. 
It  might  indeed  appear,  from  the  use 
of  the  word  '  neither '  at  the  commence- 
ment of  the  verse,  that  it  was  intimately 
connected  with  the  foregoing.  But  this 
rendering  is  not  borne  out  by  the  origi- 
nal. It  is  the  simple  particle  1  ve,  and, 
which  w;e  find  in  the  Hebrew  text,  and 
is  precisely  the  same  word  which  in  ihe 
ihree  subsequent  verses  is  translated 
respectively,  '  also,  '  moreover,'  and 
'  and  ;'  and  the  usual  paragraph  dis- 
tinction might  very  properly  have  been 
introduced  here. 

But  we  proceed  with  the  exposition. 

H  To  vex  her.    Heb.  '^^'2'^  litzror, 

to  vex  ;  i.  e.  to  produce  vexation  in  the 
family,  to  the  first  wife  mainly,  no 
doubt,  but  not  to  her  alone,  as  the  ap- 
popriate  word  for  'her'  is  wanting  in 
the  original.  Still  it  is  properly  enough 
inserted  in  our  translation.  The  origi- 
nal is  happily  expressive  of  the  mutual 
broils  and  bickerings  which  are  so  prone 
to  arise  under  a  system  of  polygamy,  and 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


197 


of  which  we  have  an  example  in  the 
case  of  Hiinnah  and  Penninah,  in  the 
family  of  Elkanah.  1  Sam.  1.  6,  7, 
*  And  her  adversary  (nD'^lZ  tzdrdthdh, 
her  vexer)  also  provoked  her  sore,  for 
to  make  her  fret,  because  the  Lord  had 
shut  up  her  womb.  And  as  she  did  so 
J  ear  by  year,  when  she  went  up  to  the 
house  of  the  Lord,  so  she  provoked  her  ; 
therefore  she  wept  and  did  not  eat.'  If 
this  was  a  state  of  things  to  be  depre- 
cated between  women  who  were  not 
related    before    marriage,    how    much 

more  between  sisters  I IT  To  uncover 

her  nakedness  besides  the  other.  Heb. 
ri'i^S'  nmnS?  mi^i  legalloth  ervathdh 
dli'hd,  to  uncover  her  nakedness  upon 
her.  The  phraseology  is  somewhat 
ambiguous,  as  it  does  not  at  once  appear 
to  wliich  of  the  sisters  the  suffix  '  her' 
infers.  Is  it  the  one  who  is  vexed 
whose  nakedness  is  uncovered,  or  the 
oilier?  It  is  to  be  observed  that 
in  the  original  there  is  no  word  strictly 
answering  to  '  the  other.'  That  which 
our  version  renders  '  besides  the  other,' 
is  in  the  Heb.  rT^^S^  upon  or  by  her, 
and  the  feminine  suffix  H  hd,  her,  un- 
doubtedly refers  to  the  same  person  as 
the  n  hd,  her,  in  nni'^S^  ervathdh,  na- 
kedness. The  true  reading  then  is — 
*  to  uncover  her  (the  first  wife's)  na- 
kedness upon  her  (the  first  wife)  in  her 
life-time.'  This  appears  to  be  the  ne- 
cessary grammatical  construction,  but 
how  does  this  vex  the  first  wife,  to  un- 
cover her  own  nakedness  upon  or  by 
herself?  The  solution  of  the  difficulty 
we  believe  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact 
clearly  intimated  in  v.  7,  that  the  na- 
kedness of  the  husband  is  the  nakedness 
of  the  wife,  and  that  what  is  here  term- 
ed the  '  uncovering  of  her  nakedness '  is 
really  the  uncovering  of  the  nakedness 
of  the  husband,  and  exposing  it  to  the 
second  wife,  which  is  of  course  done 
by,  upon,  beside  the  first,  and  therefore 

to  her  grievance  and  vexation. ^  In 

her  life-time.     Heb.  n'*''^riS  behayehd, 
in  her  life.  That  is,  as  intimated  above, 
durinff  the  period  of  her  life,  as  long 
17* 


as  she  lives.  The  next  verse  affords 
a  phraseology  strikingly  equivalent. 
'  Thou  shall  not  approach  unto  a  wo- 
man— as  long  as  she  is  set  apart,'  &c. 
This  is  expressed  in  the  Hebrew  by  the 
single  word  n"I31  beniddath,  in  her 
separation,  i.  e.  during  the  continuance 
of  her  state  of  separation.  We  give  in 
this  connexion  the  note  of  Bishop  Pa- 
trick on  this  phrase.  '  From  hence 
some  infer  that  a  man  was  permitted 
to  marry  the  sister  of  his  former  wife, 
when  she  was  dead.  So  the  Talmud- 
ists  ;  but  the  Karaites  thought  it  abso- 
lutely unlawful,  as  Mr.  Selden  observes, 
(De  Uxore  Hebr.  Lib.  1,  cap.  4).  For 
it  is  directly  against  the  scope  of  all 
these  laws,  which  prohibit  men  to  marry 
at  all  with  such  persons  as  are  here 
mentioned,  either  in  their  wives'  life- 
time or  after.  And  there  being  a  pro- 
hibition  v.  16,  to  marry  a  brother's  wife, 
it  is  unreasonable  to  think  Moses  gave 
them  leave  to  marry  their  wives'  sister. 
These  words,  therefore,  '  in  her  life- 
time,' are  to  be  referred,  not  to  the  first 
words,  '  neither  shalt  thou  take,'  but  to 
the  next,  '  to  vex  her,'  as  long  as  she 
lives.  In  this  the  ancient  Christians 
were  so  strict  that  if  a  man,  after  his 
wife  died,  married  her  sister,  he  was, 
by  the  tenth  canon  of  the  Council  of 
Eliberis,  to  be  kept  from  the  commu- 
nion for  five  years.' 

We  have  thus  given  what,  on  the 
whole,  we  are  constrained  to  regard  as 
the  genuine  sense  of  this  important  part 
of  the  Penteteuch,  both  in  its  general 
scope  and  in  its  minuter  details.  We 
may  possibly  have  erred  by  adopting 
false  principles  of  interpretation,  or  by 
a  wrong  application  of  those  which  are 
right.  But  as  we  have  candidly  stated 
the  grounds  and  evidence  of  every  posi- 
tion assumed,  the  reader  will  be  able  to 
judge  for  himself  how  far  the  premises 
sustain  the  conclusion,  and  how  far  a 
sound  exegesis  sustains  the  premises. 
To  our  minds  the  evidence  decidedly 
preponderates  in  favor  of  the  opinion 
I  that  the  lavvs  contained  in  the  present 


198 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


19  q  Also  thoushalt  not  approach 
unto  a  woman  to  uncover  her  na- 
kedness, as  lon^  as  she  is  put  apart 
for  her  uncleanness. 

20  Moreover,  r  ihou  shah  not  lie 

qch.  20.  18.  Ezek.  18.  G,  and  22.  10.  rch. 
20.  10.  Exod.  20.  14.  Deut.  5.  IS,  and  22.  22. 
Prov.  6.  29,  32.  Mai.  3.  5.  Matt.  5.  27. 
Rom.  2.  22.     1  Cor.  6.  9.     Heb.  13.  4. 


chapter  (v.  6-17),  have  respect  not 
merely  to  lewdness  in  general,  but  to 
incest — that  they  are  in  their  nature 
moral  and  not  ceremonial,  and  therefore 
universally  and  perpetually  binding — 
that  the  implied  prohibitions  are  equally 
authoriialive  with  the  express — and 
consequently  the  marriage  with  a  de- 
ceased wife's  sister  is  clearly  contrary 
to  the  revealed  word  of  God.  At  the 
same  time,  we  entertain  unfeigned  re- 
spect for  the  logical  and  philological 
reasonings  of  those  who,  under  the 
promptings  of  an  equally  sincere  desire 
to  ascertain  the  truth,  have  been  brought 
to  a  different  conclusion.  Many  of 
their  arguments  are  entitled  to  very 
great  weight,  and  we  cannot  fully  as- 
sure ourselves  that  they  have  been  fairly 
and  successfully  met  in  the  foregoing 
series  of  remarks.  But  wherever  the 
truth  may  lie,  we  still  indulge  a  strong 
confidence  that  it  will  eventually  be 
reached  ;  and  the  present  awakened 
state  of  the  Christian  mind  in  this  land 
gives  a  happy  presage  that  this  result 
will  ere  long  be  realized. 


Other  forms  of  Sexual  Commerce,  and 
still  grosser  Crimes,  forbidden. 

19.  Also  thou  shalt  not  approach  unto 
a  woman,  &c.  Heb.  HTi^  ^5%  el  isha, 
to  a  woman,  or  wife.  Consequently  not 
to  one's  own  wife.  The  penalty  annexed 
to  this  precept  is  stated  ch.  20.  IS.  The 
transgression  of  it  is  reckoned  among 
the  crying  sins  of  Israel,  Ezek.  22.  10. 

20.  Moreover,  thou  shalt  not  lie  car- 
nally, &c.   Heb.  y^T^  ^r-rr  '"irr,  s^i 

lo  titten  shekobteka  lezdra,  thou  shalt 
•not  give  thy  cohabitation  (or  concum- 


carnally  with  thy  neighbour's  wife, 
to  defile  thyself  with  her. 
21  And  thou  shalt  not  let  any  of 
thy  seed  s  pass  through  the  fire  to 
tMolech,  neither  shalt  thou  upro- 

sch.  20.  2.  2  Kings  16.  3,  and  21.  6,  and 
23.  10.  Jer.  19.  5.  Ezek.  20.  31,  and  23.  37, 
39.  t  1  Kings  11.  7,  33.  Acts  7. 43.  u  ch.  19. 
12,  and  20  3,  and  21.  6,  and  22.  2, 32.  Ezek. 
36.  20,  &.C.    Mai.  1.  12. 


bency)  to  seed  ;  i.  e.  to  the  effusion  of 
seed  ;  a  form  of  expression  sufficiently 
well  represented  by  our  version.  Le- 
clerc  suggests  that  it  may  be  intended 
to  distinguish  a  sinful  cohabitation  from 
that  accidental  but  innocent  lying  to- 
gether which  might  happen  from  some 
extraordinary  accident  in  a  flight  or 
journey. 

21.  Thou  shalt  not  let  any  of  thy  seed 
pass  through  the  fire  to  Molech.  The 
name  of  this  idol,  which  was  especially 
worshipped  by  the  Ammonites,  is  de- 
rived from  Vp!^  mulak,  to  reign,  the 
root  of  n^?2  melek,  king,  and  is  sup- 
posed to  have  represented  the  sun,  the 
great  fountain  of  fire  and  of  light.  In 
the  inhuman  worship  of  this  idol,  little 
children  were  either  actually  burnt 
alive  in  the  way  of  consecration  to  him, 
or  were  made  to  pass  between  two  rows 
of  burning  fires,  from  which  they  barely 
escaped  with  life,  and  probably  not 
always  with  that.  The  words  '  the  fire  ' 
do  not  here  occur  in  the  original,  but 
they  are  supplied  in  Deut.  IS.  10,  and 
2  Kings  11.3,  which  are  elsewhere  ex- 
plained as  apparently  equivalent  to 
'  burn  in  the  fire,'  2  Chron.  2S.  3.  Le- 
clerc  supposes  very  ingeniously  that  the 
term  '  pass  tlirough,'  omitting  '  the  fire,' 
was  invented- by  the  priests  of  Molech 
or  Moloch,  that  the  horrid  sacrifice 
might  be  expressed  by  the  mildest  pos- 
sible  phrase.  This  ibrm  of  idolatry  is 
mentioned  and  forbidden  in  the  present 
connexion,  in  the  midst  of  laws  relative 
to  incest  and  lewdness,  from  its  being 
esteemed  a  kind  of  spiritual  adultery 

IT  Neither  shalt  thou  profane    the 

name  of  thy  God.     Heb.  ^?nn  ^c'/ia/Zc/ 


B.  C.  1490.1 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 


199 


fane  the  name  of  thy  God :  I  am 
the  Lord. 

22  s  Thou  shall  not  lie  with  man- 
kind, as  with  womankind :  it  ts 
abomination. 

23  ylNeither  shalt  thou  lie  with 
any  beast  to  defile  thyself  there- 
vviih  :    neither  shall   any  woman 

X  ch.  20.  13  Rom.  1.  27.  1  Cor.  6.  9. 
1  Tim    1.  10.     y  ch.  :20.  15,  16.     Exod.  22.  19. 


pollute ;  the  cotitrary  of  hallowing  or 
sanctifying.  The  holy  name  of  God  is 
polluted  or  profaned  not  only  by  irrev- 
erent and  blasphemous  speech,  but  by 
such  conduct  as  tends  to  give  that  honor 
and  allegiance,  which  is  due  to  him 
alone,  to  another. 

22.  Thoii  shalt  not  lie  vith  mankind 
as  with  womankind.  Heb.  ^^T  TUi  eth 
zukCir^  with  a  male.  The  characteristic 
sin  of  Sodom,  and  thence  deriving  the 
name  by  which  it  is  known  in  the  crim- 
inal codes  of  modern  times.  Cornp. 
Deut.  23.  17.  It  is  enumerated  by  the 
apostle,  Rom.  1.  27,  among  the  preva- 
lent abominations  of  heathenism  ;  and 
the  best  authorities  assure  us  that  under 
the  name  of  pederasty .,  or  hoy-love,  it 
was  pri)ctised  not  only  by  several  of  the 
Roman  emperors,  but  by  some  of  the 
Greek  philosophers.  Tlie  penalty  an- 
nexed to  this  law  is  stated  as  follows, 
ch.  20. 13:  '  If  a  man  also  lie  with  man- 
kind, as  he  lielh  with  a  woman,  both  of 
them  have  committed  an  abomination: 
they  shall  surely  be  put  to  death  ;  their 
blood  shall  be  upon  them.'  The  pen- 
allies  enacted  by  modern  legislators 
against  this  and  the  crime  of  bestiality, 
evince  it  as  the  general  sense  of  en- 
ligliiened  and  Christian  nations,  that 
those  who  thus  shockingly  degrade 
human  nature  are  not  worthy  to  live 
among  men. 

General  Dissuasives. 

24.  For  in  these  all  the  nations  are 

defiled   which  I  cast    out  before    you. 

Heb.  n^ffi73  i:i^  -|!L'J*  asher  ani  mcshal- 

Wh,  which  J  am  casting   out.      The 


Stand  before  a  beast  to  lie  down 
thereto  :  it  is  ^  confusion. 

24  a  Defile  not  ye  yourselves  ia 
any  of  these  thinofs:  bfor  in  all 
these  the  nations  are  defiled  which 
I  cast  out  before  you  : 

25  And    cthe    land    is  defiled: 

z  ch.    20.    12.     a   ver.   30.  Matt.    15.    18, 

19,20.     Mark  7.  21,    22,  23.  1  Cor.  3,    17. 

boh.   20.  23,     Deut.  18.  12,  c    Numb.    S5. 

34.     Jer.  2,  7,   and   16,    18,  Ezek.   36.  17. 


Canaanites  being  divided  into  several 
clans  or  tribes,  are  spoken  of  in  the 
plural,  as '  nations  ;'  and  they,  it  appears, 
were  so  completely  overrun  with  these 
foul  abominations,  that  a  righteous  God 
could  bear  with  them  no  longer ;  and 
as  they  were  now  lymg  under  his  curse, 
so  they  were  shortly,  by  his  sword, 
wielded  by  the  hands  of  the  chosen 
people,  to  be  completely  destroyed. 
By  the  coming  doom  of  the  Canaanites, 
therefore,  he  would  have  them  to  take 
warning,  and  not  to  imagine  that  any 
peculiar  favoritism  would  save  them 
from  a  similar  destruction,  provided 
they  were  guilty  of  similar  crimes.  On 
the  other  hand,  they  might  reasonably 
anticipate  a  more  aggravated  and  fear- 
ful judgment,  according  to  the  declared 
principle  of  the  divine  administration, 
'  Because  you  only  have  I  known  of  all 
the  nations  of  the  earth,  therefore  will 
I  punish  your  iniquities.' 

25.  Therefore  I  do  visit  the  iniquity 
thereof  upon  it,  &c.  Heb.  TpSi^T 
vdephkod,  properly  I  have  visited  ;  i.  e. 
have  punished  ;  and  in  the  next  clause 
hath  vomited,  instead  of  vomiteth  ;  the 
praeterite  being  used  for  greater  em- 
phasis. The  certainty  of  the  result  was 
such,  that  it  is  spoken  of  as  if  already 

accomplished. IT    The    land    itself 

vomiteth  out  her  inhabitants.  A  bold 
rhetorical  figure,  intimating  that  ibe 
sins  of  the  inhabitants  were  so  unutter- 
ably vile  and  loathsome,  that  the  very 
land  itselfnauseated  and  abhorred  them, 
and  threw  them  out,  as  the  stomach 
does  the  food  that  offends  it. 

30.    Therefore  shall  yc    keep  mine 


200 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


therefore  I  do  ^  visit  the  iniquity 
thereof  upon  it,  and  the  land  itself 
e  Yomiteth  out  her  inhabitants. 

26  fYe  shall  therefore  keep  my 
statutes  and  my  judgments,  and 
shall  not  commit  any  of  these 
abominations;  /ie?7Aer  any  of  your 
own  nation,  nor  any  stranger  that 
sojjourneth  among  you : 

27  (For  all  these  abominations 
have  the  men  of  the  land  done, 
which  were  before  you,  and  the 
land  is  defiled;) 

28  That  g  the  land  spue  not  you 
out  also,  when  ye  defile  it,  as  it 
spued  out  the  nations  that  were 
before  you. 

29  For  whosoever  shall  commi* 
any  of  these  abominations,  even 

d  Ps.  89.  32.  Isai.  26.  21.  Jer.  6.  9,  29,  and 
9.  9,  and  14.  10,  and  23.  2.  Hos.  2.  13,  and 
8.  13,  and  9.  9.  e  yer.  28.  f  ver.  5,  30.  ch. 
20.  22,  23.  S  ch.  20.  22.  Jer.  9.  19.  Ezek. 
36.  13,  17. 

ordinance,  &c.  Heb.  r,55  tsn^^^'i: 
*^ni>2'l"l'3  shemartem  eth  mishmarti,  ye 
shall  keep  my  keepings;  i.  e.  niy  charge  ; 
that  which  I  have  delivered  you  to 
keep  ;  implyiii-g  that  the  only  way  to 
be  preserved  from  all  false  worship,  is 
seriously  to  consider  and  devoutly  to 
observe  the  ordinances  of  the  true  re- 
ligion. 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

The  present  chapter  is  devoted,  for 
the  most  part,  to  the  repetition  of  cer- 
tain laws  which  had  been  before  given, 
but  which  from  their  intrinsic  import- 
ance, the  divine  wisdom  saw  fit  to  insist 
upon  with  special  emphasis.  It  will 
be  seen  that  they  have  in  the  main  more 
reference  to  moral  than  to  positive  du- 
ties, and  brief  as  it  is,  it  may  be  confi- 
dently afiirmed  that  no  merely  human 
code  was  ever  devised  so  well  calculated 
in  its  observance  to  promote  the  well- 
being  of  the  race.  Except  in  one 
single  case  we  find  no  special  penalty 
annexed  to  the  transgression  of  these 
precepts,  but  they  are  delivered  as  self- 


the  souls  that  commit  them  shall 
be  cut  off  from  among  their  people. 
30  Therefore  shall  ye  keep  mine 
ordinance,  h  that  ye  commit  not  any 
one  of  these  abominable  customs, 
which  were  committed  before  you, 
and  that  ye  i  defile  not  yourselves 
therein:  k  I  a;n  the  Lord  your  God. 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 

2  Speak  unto  all  the  congregation 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  say 
unto  them,  a  Ye  shall  be  holy:  for 
I  the  Lord  your  God  am  holy. 

3  H  b  Ye  shall  fear  every  man  his 
mother  and  his  father,  and  c  keep 
my  sabbaths  :  I  am  the  Lord  your 
God. 

h  ver.  3,  26.  ch.  20.  23.  Deut.  19.  9. 
»  ver.  24.  k  ver.  2,  4.  a  ch.  11.  44,  and  20. 
7,  26.  1  Pet  1.  16.  b  Exod.  20.  12.  =  Exod. 
20.  S,  and  31.  13. 


enforced  on  the  simple  supreme  author- 
ity of  Him  who  enacts  them  ;  *  I  am 
the  Lord  your  God ' — a  declaration 
which  in  this  connexion  is,  as  it  were,  a 
royal  signature  to  a  solemn  edict. 

2.  Say  unto  them,  Ye  shall  he  holy : 
for  I  the  Lord  your  God  am  holy.  The 
same  sanction  had  been  given  before, 
ch.  11.  44,  in  connexion  with  the  pre- 
cepts respecting  the  distinction  of 
meats,  by  which  they  were  to  be  severed 
and  set  apart  from  all  other  nations  ; 
and  so  here  when  they  are  again  com- 
manded to  be  distinguished  from  all 
other  people  by  a  peculiar  system  of 
moral  laws  and  usages,  the  same  in- 
junction is  repeated.  Indeed  one  grand 
leading  sense  involved  in  the  term  'holy' 
is  separated,  sequestered,  set  apart  from 
that  which  is  common  and  secular. 

Enjoining  Reverence  of  Parents. 

3.  Ye  shall  fear  every  man  his  mother 
and  his  father.  The  'fear'  here  re- 
quired, is  virtually  the  same  with  the 
honor  commanded  by  the  fifth  com- 
mandment.   It  includes  inward  rever- 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XIX. 


201 


4  II  <i  Turn  ye  not  unto  idols,  c  nor 
make  to  yourselves  molten  gods: 
I  am  the  Lord  your  God. 

(1  Exod.  20.  4.  ch.  -25.  1.  1  Cor.  10.  14. 
1  John  5.  21.     e  Exod.  34.  17.     Deut.  27.  15. 

ence  und  esteem,  outward  expression  of 
respect,  obedience  to  the  lawful  com- 
mands of  parents,  care  and  endeavor  to 
please  and  render  them  comfortable,- 
and  to  avoid  any  thing  that  may  offend 
and  grieve  ihem,  or  incur  their  displea- 
sure. It  will  be  noticed  also  that  in 
this  connexion  the  '  mother '  is  men- 
tioned before  the  '  father,'  which  is  con- 
trary to  prevailing  usage.  The  two 
precepts,  '  Honor  thy  father  and  thy 
mother,'  and  •  Fear  thy  mother  and  thy 
father,'  when  taken  together  plainly 
evince  that  both  father  and  mother  are 
to  be  regarded  as  entitled  to  equal  to- 
kens of  honor,  respect,  and  reverence. 
If  the  'father'  had  been  uniformly 
placed  first,  it  might  have  impercepti- 
bly begotten  the  impression  that  the 
mother's  claims  to  veneration  were  but 

of  a  secondary  nature. IT  Keep  my 

sabbaths,  i.  e.  not  only  the  seventh  day, 
but  all  other  appointed  days,  which 
were  also  called  sabbaths.  Chal. '  Keep 
my  sabbath-days,'  This  precept  is 
joined  with  that  requiring  filial  rever- 
ence, inasmuch  as  it  is  supposed  that 
if  God  provides  by  law  for  the  preserv- 
ing  of  the  honor  of  parents,  parents  will 
use  their  authority  for  keeping  up  in 
the  minds  and  conduct  of  their  child- 
ren a  due  regard  for  the  divine  institu- 
tions, particularly  the  one  in  question. 
The  contempt  of  parents,  and  the  profa- 
nation of  the  sabbath  usually  go  toge- 
ther, and  begin  the  ruin  of  the  young. 
The  prospects  of  those  children  are  the 
brightest  who  make  conscience  of  hon- 
oring their  parents  and  keeping  holy 
the  sabbath  day. 

Idolatry  forbidden. 
4.  Turn  ye   not  unto   idols.      Heb. 
tJ'^P'^^i^n  i)5^  cZ  huelilim,  to  non-enti- 
ties.     Gr.    ovK    ETraKoXovdriccrE    fiJojXoif, 


5  %  And  f  if  ye  ofTer  a  sacrifice  of 
peace-offering's  unto  the  Lord,  ye 
shall  offer  it  at  your  own  will. 

G  It  shall  be  eaten  the  same  day 

f  ch.  7.  16. 


follow  not  idols.  The  import  of  the 
original  is  things  of  nought,  nothings, 
vanities,  in  allusion  to  which  the  apos- 
tle says,  1  Cor.  8.  4, '  We  know  that  an 
idol  is  nothing  in  the  world.'  The 
word  occurs  also  in  Job  13.  4,  *  Ye  are 
forgers  of  lies,  ye  are  all  physicians  of 
no  value  (^^^  *'i^51  rophie  elil,  phy- 
sicians of  nought),'  which  gives  still 
farther  light  upon  the  meaning  of  the 
term.  To  such  idols  they  were  not  to 
'  turn '  in  a  way  of  heed,  affection,  con- 
sultation, or  worship.  They  were  not 
to  regard  them  but  with  the  utmost  ab- 
horrence, and  as  the  chief  of  all  abomi- 
nations. They  could  not  turn  to  them, 
without  turning  away  from   God,  and 

this  would  be  downright  apostacy. 

IT  Nor  make  to  yourselves  molten  gods. 
Heb.  tl'Z^TZ  ^ni5<  elohii  massekah,  gods 
of  molting,  such,  for  instance,  as  was 
the  molten  calf  fabricated  by  Aaron  at 
the  instigation  of  the  people,  Ex.  32.  4. 
The  spirit  of  the  precept  prohibits,  of 
course,  every  species  of  image,  whether 
molten  or  graven,  designed  as  a  repre- 
sentative of  any  object  of  worship. 
Habak.  2.  IS,  '  What  profiteth  the  gra- 
ven image  that  the  maker  thereof  hath 
graven  it ;  the  molten  image,  and  (even) 
a  teacher  of  lies,  that  the  maker  of  his 
work  trusteth  therein,  to  make  dumb 
idols?' 

Concerning  Peace-offerings. 
5-8.  If  ye  offer  a  sacrifice  of  peace- 
offerings,  &c.  As  they  were  to  avoid 
all  idolatry,  so  they  were  to  be  careful 
to  perform  the  service  due  to  God  in 
the  prescribed  manner.  Peace-offerings 
are  here  mentioned  as  perhaps  the  most 
common,  but  the  spirit  of  the  precept 
doubtless  applies  to  all  others.  The 
various  rites  and  ceremonies  connected 
with  this  offering  have  been  already 


202 


LEVITICUS. 


[B;  C.  1490. 


ye  offer  it,  and  on  the  morrow:  and 
if  aught  remain  until  the  third  day, 
it  shall  be  burnt  in  the  fire. 

7  And  if  it  be  eaten  at  all  on  the 
third  day,  it  is  abominable;  it  shall 
not  be  accepted. 

8  Therefore  every  one  that  eateth 
it  shall  bear  his  iniquity,  because 
he  hath  profaned  the' hallowed 
thing  of  the  Lord;  and  that  soul 

detailed,  ch.  3.  7,  16. IT  Ye  shall  offer 

it  at  your  own  will.  Or  rather,  accord- 
ing  to  the  Heb.  ^^21:^^  lirtzonekem, 
'  to  your  favorable  acceptation,'  i.  e.  in 
such  a  manner  as  may  secure  the  divine 
favor  and  acceptance,  which  it  would 
not  do  if  it  were  offered  otherwise  than 
in  exact  accordance,v,ith  the  prescribed 
mode.     .See  Note  on  Lev.  1.  3. 

Gleanings  to  be  left  for  the  Poor. 
9.  When  ye  reap  the  harvest  of  your 
land,  thou  shall  not  wholly  reap,  &c. 
Ileb.  ^T::  r.i^D  n^rn  i^b  lo  tekalleh 
peath  sadeka,  thou  shall  not  finish,  con- 
sumviate,make  a  full  end  of,  the  corner 
cf  i^^y  fi^ld ;  tl.ou  shalt  not  make  a 
clean  riddance  of  it.  On  this  precept 
the  Jewish  canons  remark,  '  He  that 
reapeth  his  field  must  not  reap  all  the 
field  wholly  ;  but  must  leave  a  little 
standing  corn  for  the  poor  in  the  end  of 
the  field,  whether  he  cut  it  or  pluck  it 
up:  and  that  which  is  left  is  called  the 
corner  (njiS  pcah).  And  as  he  must 
.eave  of  the  field,  so  of  the  trees,  when 
he  gathereih  iheir  fruit,  he  must  leave  a 
little  for  the  poor.'  The  Jewish  writers 
say  that  a  sixtieth  part  was  left.  How- 
ever this  may  be,  the  precept  is  full  of 
interest,  as  exhibiting  a  very  amiable 
feature  of  the  Levitical  law,  which  in 
many  of  its  provisions  breathed  a  spirit 
of  humane  and  benevolent  consideration, 
for  which  we  look  in  vain  to  any  other 
code,  either  of  ancient  or  modern  times, 
'  The  right  of  the  poor  in  Israel  to  glean 
after  the  reapers,  was  thus  secured  by  a 
positive  law.  It  is  the  opinion  of  some 
writers,  that  although  the  poor  were 


shall  be  cut  off  from  among  his 
people. 

I    9  H  And  g  when  ye  reap  the  har- 
vest of  your  land,  thou  shalt  not 

I  wholly  reap  the  corners  of  thy  field, 
neither  shalt  thou  gather  the  glean- 
ings of  thy  harvest. 
]  0  And  thou  shalt  not  glean  thy 

?  ch.  23.  22.     Deut.  24.  19,  20,  21.     Ruth 
2.  15.  16. 


allowed  the  liberty  of  gleaning,  the 
Israelilish  proprietors  were  not  obliged 
to  admit  them  immediately  into  the 
field,  as  soon  as  the  reapers  had  cut 
down  the  corn,  and  bound  it  up  in 
sheaves,  but  when  it  was  carried  ofi'j 
they  might  choose  also  among  the 
poor,  whom  they  thought  most  deserv- 
ing  or  most  necessitous.  These  opin- 
ions receive  some  countenance  from  the 
request  which  Ruth  presented  to  the 
servant  of  Boaz,  to  permit  her  to  glean 
'  among  the  sheaves  :'  and  from  the 
charge  of  Boaz  to  his  young  men,  'let 
her  glean  even  among  the  sheaves;'  a 
mode  of  speaking  which  seems  to  insin- 
uate, that  though  they  could  not  legally 
hinder  Ruth  from  gleaning  in  the  field, 
they  had  a  right,  if  they  chose  to  exer- 
cise it,  lo  prohibit  her  from  gleaning 
among  the  sheaves,  or  immediately 
after  the  reapers.' — Paxton. IT  Nei- 
ther shalt  thou  gather  the  gleanings  of 
the  harvest.  That  is,  if  a  few  ears  of 
corn,  as  they  were  cutting  or  binding  it 
up,  fell  out  of  the  sheaves  or  from  under 
the  sickle,  they  were  not  to  gather  them 
up  from  the  ground,  but  to  leave  them 
for  the  poor.  And  so  also  in  respect  to 
the  scattered  grape-clusters  of  the  vin- 
tage. The  rule  thus  given  was  intended 
for  the  benefit  not  only  of  the  poor,  but 
also  of  the  *f ranger ;  for  as  strangers 
and  foreigners  could  not  hold  their  pos- 
sessions on  the  same  advantageous 
terms  as  native  Israelites,  they  were 
very  liable  to  be  oppressed  by  poverty. 
It  is  easy  to  perceive  that  the  natural 
tendency  of  this  law  was  to  inculcate  a 
kindly,    liberal,    generous    spirit,   the 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XIX. 


203 


vineyard,  neither  shalt  thou  gather 
(■very  grape  of  thy  vineyard  ;  thou 
&hak  leave  them  for  the  poor  and 
stranger :  I  am  the  Lord  your  God. 

1 1  11  h  Ye  shall  not  steal,  neither 
deal  falsely,  i  neither  lie  one  to 
another.  { 

12  1[  And  ye  shall  not  '•^svv'-ear  by  j 

n  Exod.  20.  15,  and  22.  1,  7,    10.     Deut.  5.  j 
iO.      '   cIj.    6.    i.      Eph.  4.    25.      Col.    3.  9.  i 
•  £\-od.  20.  7.     ch.6.3.     Deut.  5.  11,     Matt. 
5.  33.     Jain.  5.  12. 

(iiiect  reverse  of  a  disposition  covetous 
uiul  griping,  and  which  would  prompt  a 
m  ui  vigorously  to  insist  on  his  right  in 
{.-latlers  small  and  trivial.  It  is  a  les- 
son which  the  selfish  nature  of  man 
iieeds  to  have  powerfully  enforced  upon 
him,  that  that  is  not  necessarily  lost  or 
wasted,  which  goes  to  relieve  the  wants 
or  diminish  the  woes  of  our  common 
J.iumaniiy. 

Against  Stealing.  Lying,  False  Swear- 
ing, and  Defrauding. 
11-13.  Ye  shall  not  steal,  Sic.  A  num- 
ber of  moral  precepts,  important  to  the 
upholding  of  truth  and  justice  in  society, 
are  here  inserted.  The  drift  of  them  is 
to  inculcate  a  rigid  adherence  to  truth 
in  our  communications,  and  to  honesty 
in  our  dealings  with  our  fellow  men. 
Stealing  had  been  before  forbidden  in 
the  eighth  commandment,  and  lying  in 
the  ninth  ;  but  they  are  here  repeated 
and  put  together,  because  they  generally 
go  together.  He  that  will  steal  will  lie 
to  hide  it;  and  he  that  will  lie  shows 
that  the  first  moral  barrier  is  broken 
down   which  stands  in  the  way  of  the 

commission  of  any  and  all  crimes. 

^  Thoic  shalt  not  defraud  thy  neighbor 
nor  rob  him.  Heb.  pZViTl  taas'ok  and 
PTan  tigzol.  The  first  of  these  terms 
signifies  in  the  original  to  oppress  by 
fraud,  the  second,  to  oppress  by  vio- 
lence.  Against  both  these  offences 
John  the  Baptist  warned  the  soldiers 
who  came  to  him,  Luke  3.  14,  '  And  he 
said  unto  them,  JDo  violence  to  no  man, 
neither  accuse  any  falsely;  and  be  con- 


my   name  falsely,   i  neither   shalt 
j  thou  profane  the  name  of  thy  God : 
I  am  the  Lokd. 

13  11  m  Thou  shalt  not  defraud  thy 
neighbour,  neither  rob  him :  ^  the 
wages  of  him  that  is  hired  shall 
not  abide  with  thee  all  night  until 
the  morning. 

14  H  Thou  shalt  not  curse  the 

1  ch.  IS.  21.  mMark  10.  19.  1  Thess.  4 
6.     n  Deut.  24.  14,  15.     Mai.  3.  5. 


tent  with  your  wages.'  These  sins  of 
fraudulent  oppression  and  robbery  are 
often  charged  by  the  prophets  upon  the 
nation  of  Israel.     See  Is.  3.  14.     Jer. 

22.  2. nr  The  wages  of  him  that  is 

hired  shall  not  abide,  &c.  Inasmuch  as 
the  wages  of  the  hireling,  a  day-laborer, 
were  the  support  of  himself  and  family, 
and  they  would  necessarily  be  forced  to 
expend  it  as  fast  as  it  could  be  earned. 
There  are  few  sins  marked  in  the  Scrip- 
tures more  with  the  emphatic  reproba- 
tion of  heaven  than  the  withholding  of 
wages  from  those  to  whom  they  are 
due.  James  5.  1,  4,  *  Go  to  now,  ye  rich 
men,  weep  and  howl  for  your  miseries 
that  shall  come  upon  you.  »  ,  Behold, 
the  hire  of  the  laborers  who  have  reaped 
down  your  fields,  which  is  of  you  kept 
back  by  fraud,  crieth;  and  the  cries  of 
them  which  have  reaped  are  entered 
into  the  ears  of  the  Lord  of  Sabaolh.' 
If  the  Scriptures  had  approved  the  sys- 
tem of  '  credit '  in  doing  business,  it 
would  scarcely  have  been  so  strenuous 
in  the  requisition  for  prompt  payment. 

Against  taking  advantage  of  the  Infirm' 
ity  of  the  Deaf  or  Blind. 
14.  Thou  shalt  not  curse.  Heb. 
bipn  i^^  lo  tekalltl,  thou  shalt  not  vili' 
fy,  defame,  contemptuously  disparage. 
Gr.  ovK  KaKCJi  ipeis,  thou  shalt  not  speak 
evil  of.  Not  being  able  to  hear,  he 
could  not,  of  course,  vindicate  his  own 
character.  In  cursing  one  who  could 
hear  there  was  no  doubt  a  wicked  ma. 
lignity;  but  in  cursing  the  deaf  there 
was,  moreover,  an  inexpressible  meark- 


204 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


deaf,  o  nor  put  a  stumbling-block 
before  the  blind,  but  shah  p  fear 
thy  God  :  I  am  the  Lord. 

15  ^q  Ye  shall  do  no  unrighteous- 
ness in  judgment;  thou  shalt  not 
respect  tlie  person  of  the  poor,  nor 
honour  the  person  of  the  mighty: 

o  Deut  -27.  IS.  Rom.  14.  13.  P  ver.  32. 
ch.  i5.  n.  Gen.  42.  18.  Eccles.  5.  7.  1  Pet. 
2.  17.  q  Exod.  23.  2,  3.  Deut.  1.17,  and  16. 
19,  and  27.  19.  Ps.  82.  2.  Prov.  24.  23. 
James  2.  9. 


ness.  The  case  of  the  absent,  who  are 
out  of  hearing  of  the  curse,  is  obviously 
the  same  as  that  of  the  deaf,  and  we  see 
no  reason  why  the  prohibition  does  not 

include   both. IT  Nor  put   a   stum- 

Ming  block  before  the  blind.  Gr.  ov 
■!Tpoadn(yctg  crK(ii6a\oi/,  thou  shalt  not  put 
a  scandal  (a  cause  of  stumbling  or 
offence).  This  precept  the  gospel 
makes  universal.  Rom.  14.  13,  'Let 
no  man  put  a  stumbling-block  (Gr. 
cKav6a\ot',  a  scandal),  in  his  brother's 
way.'  Again,  Matt.  IS.  1,  <  Woe  unto 
the  world  because  of  offences  (Gr. 
cKavfjoXa^scandals , or  stumbling-blocks).' 
The  spirit  of  these  precepts  is  to  forbid 
not  only  the  ridiculing  the  bodily  infir- 
mities, but  the  taking  advantage,  in 
any  case,  of  the  ignorance,  simplicity, 
or  inexperience  of  others,  particularly 
the  giving  bad  counsel  to  those  that  are 
simple  and  easily  imposed  upon,  by 
which  they  may  be  led  to  do  something 
to  their  own  injury.  On  the  contrary, 
we  are  always  to  do  to  our  neighbor  as 
we  would,  upon  a  change  of  circum- 
stances, that  he  should  do  to  us. 

ir  Shalt  fear  thy  God.  Though  thou 
mayest  not  fear  the  deaf  and  the  blind, 
V'ho  cannot  call  thee  to  an  account,  yet 
remember  that  God  both  sees  and  hears, 
and  he  will  avenge  thy  wickedness. 

Against  respect  of  Persons  in  Judgment. 
15.  Thou  shalt  not  respect  the  person 
of  the  poor.  Heb.  t)"^::;  i^m  &^i  lo 
tiss'e  pdnim,  thou  shalt  not  lift  up  or 
accept  the  face.  That  is,  shalt  not  show 
favor  from  private  regards,  and  thus 


but    in   righteousness   shalt    thou 
judge  thy  neighbour. 

16  ^  r  Thou  shalt  not  go  up  and 
down  as  a  tale-bearer  among  thy 
people;  neither  shalt  thou  »  stand 
against  the  blood  of  thy  neighbour ; 
I  am  the  Lord. 


r  Esod.  23.  1.  Ps.  15.  3,  and  50.  20.  Prov. 
II.  13,  aud  20.  19.  Ezek.  22.  9.  »  Eiod.  23. 
1,  7.     1  Kings  21.  13.     Matt.  26    60,  61,  and 

27.  4. 


pervert  the  cause  of  justice.  See  the 
phrase  explained  Gen.  19.  21.  Though 
the  poverty  of  the  poor  might  plead 
strongly  in  their  favor,  yet  this  was  not 
to  intiuence  the  decisions  of  the  judge. 

Against  Tale-bearing. 
16.  Thou  shalt  not  go  up  and  down 
as  a  tale-bearer  among  thy  people.  Heb. 
))^'D^  ']'^n  i<^  lo  telek  rakil.  The  orig- 
inal p*i«'^  rakil  properly  signifies  a 
trader,  a  pedlar,  and  is  here  applied  to 
one  who  travels  up  and  down  dealing  in 
slanders  and  detractions,  as  a  merchant 
does  in  wares,  possessing  himself  of  the 
secrets  of  individuals  and  of  families, 
and  then  blazing  them  abroad,  usually 
with  a  false  coloring  as  to  motives,  and 
a  distortion  of  facts.  In  the  Septuagint 
the  Heb.  is  rendered,  Prov.  11.  13,  and 
20.  19,  by  a  word  signifying  'double- 
tongued  ;'  and  in  the  New  Testament 
the  term  seems  to  be  SiaiSo'Xoi  diabolos, 
false  accuser,  slanderer,  calumniator. 
The  Chal.  renders  the  present  passage 
'  Thou  shalt  not  divulge  accusations,  or 
detractions,  among  the  people.'  In  this 
sense  the  word  is  employed  Dan.  6.  24, 
in  reference  to  '  the  men  which  had 
accused  (^iaPo\avTas slandered)  Daniel,' 
and  analogous  to  this  the  common  name 
applied  to  the  Devil  in  Greek  is  ciaff- 
o'Xoi  diabolos,  from  his  character  of 
calumniator  and  '  accuser  of  the  breth- 
ren,' denominated  in  the  Syriac,  Matt. 
4.  1,5,  8,  &c.,  a  '  divulger  of  accusa- 
tions.'  IT  Neither  shalt  thou    stand 

against  the  blood,  &c.  That  is,  thou 
shalt  neither  be  a  false  witness  lo  the 


B.  C.  U90.J 


CHAPTER  XIX. 


205 


17  *f[tThou  shalt  not  hate   thy 
brother  in  thine  heart :  u  thou  shalt 

t  1  John  '1.  9, 11,  and  3. 15.    "  Matt.  18.  15. 
Luke  17.  3.    Gal.  6.  J.    Ephes.  5.  11.    1  Tim. 

endangering  of  a  man's  Hfe,  nor  shalt 
iliou  siaiul  by  and  see  thy  neighbor  in- 
j"ied,  crushed,  ruined,  and  perhaps  his 
ti.'tr  tuken,  without  an  eltort  to  save  him. 
This  jirecepl  is  joined  with  the  preced- 
ing, Ijecause  tale-bearing,  by  sowing 
discord  and  breeding  broils  in  society 
often  led  to  the  shedding  of  blood. 
Thus  Ezelc.  22.  9,  '  In  thee  are  men  that 
carry  tales  to  shed  blood.'  The  case  of 
Doeg,  ]  Sam.  22.  9,  18,  is  one  singularly 
in  point  in  the  present  instance.  '  Then 
answered  Doeg  the  Edomite,  which  was 
set  over  the  servants  of  Saul,  and  said, 
I  saw  the  son  of  Jesse  coming  to  Nob, 
to  Abimelech  the  son  of  Ahitub,  &c. 
And  the  king  said  to  Doeg,  Turn  thou 
and  fall  upon  the  priests.  And  Doeg 
the  Edomite  turned,  and  fell  upon  the 
priests,  and  slew  in  that  day  fourscore 
and  five  persons  that  did  wear  a  linen 
ephod.' 

Against  Hatred  and  Uncharitableness. 
17.  Thou  shalt  not  hate  thy  brother  in 
thine  heart.  That  is,  thou  shalt  not 
conceal  thy  hatred  against  him  for  any 
wrong  that  he  has  done  thee  ;  but  shall 
mildly  yet  faithfully  rebuke  him,  en- 
deavoring to  convince  him  of  the  wrong, 
and  to  bring  him  both  to  acknowledge 
his  sin  before  God,  and  to  make  the 
adequate  reparation.  The  Jews  explain 
the  precept  thus:  *  When  any  man  sin- 
neth  against  another,  he  must  not  in- 
wardly hate  him  and  keep  silence  ;  as 
it  is  said  of  the  wicked,  And  Absalom 
spake  unto  his  brother  Amnon  neither 
good  nor  bad,  for  Absalom  hated  Am- 
non, 2  Sam.  13.  22  ;  but  he  is  command- 
ed to  make  it  known  unto  him,  and  to 
say,  Why  hast  thou  done  thus  unto 
me?'  This  is  confirmed  by  the  Gospel 
rule,  Luke  17.  3,  'If  thy  brother  sin 
against  thee,  rebuke  him  ;  and  if  he  re- 
cent, forgive  him.'  It  is  possible,  how- 
18 


in  any  wise  rebuke  thy  neighbour, 
and  not  suffer  sin  upon  him. 

5.  20.  2  Thn.  4.  2.  Tit.  1.  13,  and  2.  15. 
See  Rom.  1.  32.  1  Cor.  5.  2.  1  Tim.  5.  22. 
2  John  11. 


ever,  that  the  word  '  hate,'  may  here 
be  intended  to  be  used  rather  in  the 
sense  oi  virtual  or  constructive  hatred, 
as  when  it  is  said  that  the  parent  who 
withholds  the  rod  hates  the  child  ;  by 
which  it  is  evidently  implied,  that  one 
who  fails  to  evince  the  proper  tokens 
of  love,  is  considered  as  indulging  the 
sentiments  of  hate.  God  in  his  word  so 
regards  and  speaks  of  it.  Thus,  in  the 
present  instance,  the  man  who  saw  his 
brother,  i.  e.  his  neighbor,  yielding  to 
or  living  in  sin,  and  forbore  faithfully 
to  rebuke  him  on  account  of  it,  was  to 
be  considered  as  acting  the  part  of  an 
enemy  instead  of  a  friend  ;  and  the  con- 
duct of  an  enemy  is  naturally  supposed 
to  be  prompted  by  hatred  instead  of 
love. IT  Thou  shalt  in  any  wise  re- 
buke thy  neighbor.  Heb.  rT^Din  HSin 
'hok'ta'h  tokia'h,  rebuking  thou  shalt 
rebuke  J  i.  e.  thou  shalt  by  all  means 
rebuke,  or,  thou  shalt  freely,  plainly, 
soundly  rebuke.  The  true  force  of  the 
original  is  to  convince,  or  rather  to  con- 
vict, of  wrong  by  reasoning  and  argu- 
ment. Gr.  eXcy^iis  rov  ir'Xrjaiov  aov, 
thou  shalt  convincingly  or  demonstra- 
tively reprove  thy  neighbor. IT  And 

not  suffer  sin  upon  him.  Heb.  J^i) 
ti^n  1i^:s>  i^lL'n  to  tlssd  aiauv  Ut,  which 
may  perhaps  be  correctly  rendered, 
'  Thou  shalt  not  bear  sin  (or  punish- 
ment) for  him  ;'  i.  e.  thou  shalt  not,  on 
his  account,  for  his  sake,  by  reason  of 
neglecting  to  do  your  duty  to  him,  con- 
tract guilt  to  your  own  soul.  This  is 
the  usual  and  appropriate  meaning  of 
the  phrase,  as  appears  from  Lev.  22.  9, 
'  They  shall  therefore  keep  mine  ordi- 
nance, lest  they  bear  sin  for  it.'  Num. 
18.  32,  '  And  ye  shall  bear  no  sin  by 
reason  of  it  ;'  where  the  original  is  the 
same  as  in  the  present  case.  And  in 
this  sense  both  the  Greek  and  the  Chal- 
daic  understand  it.    The  import  is,  that 


206 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


IS  Hx  Thou  shall  not  avenge,  nor  I  19  *i[  Ye  shall  keep  my  statutes, 
bear  any  grudge  against  the  child-  i  Thou  shalt  not  let  thy  cattle  gen- 
ren  of  thy  people,  y  but  thou  shalt  I  der  with  a  diverse  kind  :  z  thou 
love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself:  I  i  shalt  not  sow  thy  field  with  min- 
gled seed:  a  neither  shall  a  gar- 
ment mingled  of  linen  and  woollea 
come  upon  thee. 

z  Deut.  2-2.  9,  10.     a  Deut.  22.  11. 

Lord  thy  God.  We  have  here  in  the 
midst  of  the  Jewish  code  the  grand 
moral  law  of  the  gospel,  and  that  wliich 
our  Savior  himself  gives  as  comprising 
the  sum  of  the  second  table  of  the  Deca- 
logue, or  all  the  duties  which  we  owe 
to  our  fellow-men.  And  this  law  is 
enforced  by  the  solemn  sanction  con- 
tained in  the  words,  *  I  am  the  Lord 
your  God  ;'  q.  d.  I  am  he  who  searches 
and  perfectly  knows  your  hearts,  and 
the  disjiositions  which  you  cherish, and 
who  will  reward  and  punish  you  accord' 
ingly.  Nothing  shows  more  conclu- 
sively how  false  and  groundless  are  the 
charges  sometimes  brought  against  the 
Mosaic  code  as  not  only  stern,  cruel, 
and  barbarous,  but  as  insisting  solely 
on  certain  outward  rites  and  duties 
without  any  respect  to  inward  disposi 
lions  and  motives. 

Against  Mixtures  in  Cattle,  Seed,  and 

Garments. 

19.  Ye  shall  keep  my  statutes.    These 

words  are  here  inserted  lest  the  ensuing 

ordinance  should   be  deemed  of  little 

moment  and  so  be  neglected. IT  Thou 

shalt  not  let  thy  cattle  gender  with  a 
diverse  kind.  This  might  perhaps 
have  been  forbidden  in  order  to  impress 
the  Israelites  with  a  greater  abhorrence 
of  the  crime  of  bestiality,  or  at  least  to 
afford  them  among  the  brute  creation 
no  example  of  those  unnatural  com- 
mixtures which  were  prohibited  in  the 
foregoing  chapter,  v.  22,  23.  Yet  it 
would  seem  that  it  was  not  forbidden 
them  to  use  animals  produced  from  such 
mixtures,  as  we  find  mules  very  fre- 
quently mentioned  in  the  sacred  history, 
which  it  is  well  known  are  gendered  in 


arn  the  Lord. 

«  2  Sam.  13.  22.  Prov.  20.  22.  Rom.  12. 
17,19.  Gal.  5.  20.  Eph.  4.31.  1  Pet.  2.  1. 
Jam.  5.  9.  y  Matt.  6.  43,  and  22.  39.  Rom. 
13.  9.     Gah  5.  14.     Jam.  2.  8. 


a  man  who  failed  to  reprove  sin  in  ano- 
ther rendered  himself  obnoxious  to  the 
same  punishment  as  the  original  offend- 
er. The  phrase,  however,  may  bear 
the  sense  given  it  in  our  version,  which 
is  equivalent  to  saying,  '  Thou  shalt  not 
suffer  him  to  go  on  in  sin  by  neglecting 
to  inform  of  it ;  shalt  not  leave  him  un- 
der the  guilt  of  sin  unreproved.'  The 
saying  of  one  of  the  Jewish  rabbins  was 
long  current  as  a  proverb  among  the 
nation,  *  That  Jerusalem  had  not  been 
destroyed,  but  because  one  neighbor  did 
not  reprove  another.' 

Against  Revenge. 
18.  Thou  shalt  not  avenge,  kc.  That 
is,  thou  shalt  not  take  into  thine  own 
hands  the.  business  of  redressing  thy 
wrongs,  nor  shalt  thou  refuse  to  do  a 
kindness  from  the  remembrance  of  in- 
juries past.     Gr.  ovK  exSiKarai  aov  rj  %£ip, 

let  not   thine   hand  avenge. IT  Nor 

h,ear  any  grudge.  Heb.  "Iljn  K^  lo  tit- 
tor,  thou  shalt  not  watch,  mark,  or 
insidiously  observe,  the  sins  of  thy  peo- 
ple ;  i.  e.  thou  shalt  not  harbor  resent- 
ment, and  covertly  watch  an  opportunity 
to  '  feed  fat  an  ancient  grudge.'  Gr. 
ov  f<r?f(c«f,  thou  shalt  not  bear  inveterate 
anger.  Chal.  '  Thou  shalt  not  keep 
(harbor)  enmity.'  So  God  is  said, 
Nah.  1.  2,  'to  take  vengeance  on  his 
adversaries,  and  lo  keep  (watch)  for 
his  enemies.'  But  not  so  towards  his 
people,  Jer.  3.  12, '  For  I  am  merciful, 
sailh  the  Lord,  and  I  will  not  keep 
(anger)  for  ever.'  Ps.  103.  9, '  He  will 
not  always  chide  ;  nor  keep  (his  anger) 
for  ever  ;'  in  all  which  icases  the  origi- 
nal word  is  the  same. IT  Thou  shalt 

love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself:  I  am  the 


B.  C.  14900 


CHAPTER  XIX. 


207 


20  H  And  whosoever  lieth  car- 
nally with  a  woman  that  w  a  bond- 
maid betrothed  to  an  husband,  and 
not  at  all  redeemed,  nor  freedom 
given  her;  she  shall  be  scourged: 
they  shall  not  be  put  to  death,  be- 
cause she  was  not  free. 

this  manner.  See  Note  on  Gen.  36.  24. 
As  to  seeds,  it  would  in  many  cases,  be 
very  improper  to  sow  different  kinds  in 
the  same  spot  of  ground,  as  many  spe- 
cies of  vegetables  are  disposed  to  mix 
and  thus  produce  a  very  degenerate 
crop.  Thus  if  oats  and  wheat  were 
sown  together,  the  latter  would  be  in- 
jured, the  ibrmer  ruined.  The  turnip 
and  carrot  would  not  succeed  conjoiaily, 
when  either  of  them  separately  would 
prosper  and  yield  a  good  crop  ;  and  if 
this  be  all  that  is  intended,  the  precept 
here  given  is  agreeable  to  the  soundest 
agricultural  maxims.  As  to  garments, 
the  prohibition  might  have  been  merely 
intended  to  keep  them  aloof  from  the 
superstitious  customs  of  the  heathen,  or 
to  intimate  how  careful  they  should  be 
not  to  mingle  themselves  with  the 
Gentiles,  nor  to  weave  any  profane 
usages  into  God's  ordinances. 

Relative  to  the  Bond-maid  betrothed. 

20.  Whosoever  lieth  carnally  with  a 
woman  that  is  a  bond-maid.  The  exact 
rendering  of  the  Hebrew  is, '  And  a  man 
v.'hen  he  lieth  with  a  woman  (with)  the 
lyjng  of  seed,'  to  which  our  version 
comes  sufficiently  near.  In  order  fully 
to  understand  the  drift  of  the  precept,  it 
must  be  borne  in  mind,  that  Gentile 
servants  were  often  found  among  the 
Hebrews,  and  these,  if  proselyted,  were 
baptized,  and  that  either  with  a  reser- 
vation of  their  servitude,  or  with  a  full 
and  free  discharge.  But  it  appears  that 
there  were  some  in  a  kind  of  interme- 
diate or  half-way  condition,  partly  free 
and  partly  servile,  viz.,  when  part  only 
of  their  redemption-money  had  been 
paid,  a  balance  yet  remaining.  Now  as 
no  Israelite  might  marry  such  a  woman 


21  And  bhe  shall  bring  his  tres- 
pass-offering unto  the  Lord,  unto 
the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation,  even  a  ram  for  a  tres- 
pass-offering. 

22  And  the  priest  shall  make  an 

b  ch.  5.  15,  and  6.  6. 


while  perfectly  a  slave ;  so,  although 
he  might  espouse  her  when  partly  free, 
and  the  espousals  be  valid,  yet  they 
could  not  be  of  full  force  till  her  enfran* 
chisement  was  complete.  Of  a  bond- 
woman in  these  circumstances  the  He- 
brew doctors  understand  Moses  in  this 
passage  to  speak,  as  Maimonides  says 
expressly,  *  The  bond-woman  betrothed 
spoken  of  in  the  law,  is  one  that  is  half  a 
bond-woman  and  half  a  free-woman,  and 
betrothed  to  an  Hebrew  servant.''    Gr. 

she  shall  be  reserved  a  household-ser- 
vant for  a  man. ^  Not  at  all  re- 
deemed, nor  freedom  given  her.  Ra- 
ther, not  fully,  not  entirely  redeemed, 
but  only  in  part  ;  and  therefore  her 
freedom  not  absolutely  granted  to  her. 

U   She    shall  be  scourged.      Heb. 

rr^nri  ri"lpD  blkkoreth  tHiyeh,  there 
shall  be  a  scourging.  The  original 
n^ipn  bikkoreth  from  the  root  1p3  bd- 
kar,  to  search,  to  inquire  into,  to  ex- 
amine  diligently,  to  take  note  of  any 
person  or  thing,  and  thence  in  the  de- 
rivative inquisition,  animadversion, 
punishment,  the  frequent  effect  of  a 
rigid  examination,  of  a  close  and  pry- 
ing scrutiny.  Gr.  iarai  eTriaKonr],  there 
shall  be  visitation.  If  she  had  been 
perfectly  free  both  parties  would  have 
been  put  to  death  by  virtue  of  the  law, 
Deut.  22.  23,  25.  But  not  being  fully 
free,  and  consequently  not  fully  the 
wife  of  her  betrothed,  it  was  not  counted 
adultery  ;  and  therefore  punished  only 
with  scourging.  From  the  literal  ren- 
dering, '  there  shall  be  scourging,'  it 
would  doubtless  seem  that  both  parties 
were  to  share  in  it  alike  ;  but  the  He- 
brew canons  and  the  current  of  rabbin- 
ical authoritv  favor  rather  the  rendering 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


atonement  for  him  with  the  ram 
of  the  trespass-offering  before  the 
Lord  for  his  sin  which  he  hath 
done ;  and  the  sin  Avhich  he  hath 
done  shall  be  forgiven  him. 
23  H  And  when  ye  shall  come 
into  the  land,  and  shall  have  plant- 
ed all  manner  of  trees  for  food ; 

of  the  English  text—'  She  shall  be 
scourged.'  Maimonides  says,  '  The 
lying  with  this  bond-wonnan  differeth 
from  all  other  unlawful  connexions  ;  for 
lo,  she  is  to  be  beaten,  and  he  is  bound 
to  bring  a  trespass-offering.'  So  in  the 
Talmud  (Cheret.  c.  2.)  it  is  said,  '  in 
all  unlawful  connexions,  whether  it  be 
man  or  woman,  they  are  alike  in  stripes 
and  in  sacrifice  :  but  in  the  case  of  the 
bond-woman,  the  man  is  not  like  to  the 
woman  in  stripes,  nor  the  woman  to  the 
man  in  sacrifice.' 

Relative  to  the  Fruit  of  Trees. 
23.  And  when  ye  shall  have  come  into 
the  land.  That  is,  into  the  promised 
land,  to  which  alone  it  would  seem  this 
precept  had  reference.  That  it  was 
based  upon  any  thing  beyond  natural 
reasons,  we  see  no  grounds  for  believ- 
ing ;  though  Spencer  and  others  have 
suggested  that  as  the  trees  which  they 
would  find  growing  on  their  entrance 
into  the  land  were  planted  by  idolaters, 
and  probably  wdth  superstitious  cere- 
monies,  their  fruit  being  considered  by 
the  Israelites  as  for  a  time  unclean, 
would  tend  to  impress  their  minds  with 
an  idea  of  the  impurity  and  abominable 
nature  of  idolatry.  But  it  is  evident 
from  the  text,  that  the  precept  has 
reference  to  such  trees  as  they  should 
themselves  plant,  and  that  it  was  to  be 
of  like  permanent  authority  with  the 
other  enactments  of  the  Levitical  code. 
Nor  do  we  doubt  that  an  adequate 
knowledge  of  vegetable  physiology 
would  disclose  the  utmost  propriety  in 
the  direction.  Indeed  Michaelis  says. 
Comment,  on  Laws  of  Moses,  vol.  3. 
p.  367-8,  '  The  economical  object  of 


then  ye  shall  count  the  fruit  thereof 
as  uncircumcised  :  three  years  shall 
it  be  as  uncircumcised  unto  you: 
it  shall  not  be  eaten  of. 

24  But  in  the  fourth  year  all  the 
fruit  thereof  shall  be  holy  c  to  praise 
the  Lord  icithal. 

c  Deut.  12.  17,  IS.     Prov.  3.  9, 


this  law  is  very  striking.  Every  gar- 
dener will  teach  us  not  to  let  fruit-trees 
bear  in  their  earliest  years,  but  to  pluck 
off  the  blossoms  ;  and  for  this  reason, 
that  they  will  thus  thrive  the  better, 
and  bear  more  abundantly  afterwards. 
Now,  if  we  may  not  taste  the  fruit  the 
first  three  years,  we  shall  be  the  more 
disposed  to  pinch  off  the  blossoms  ;  and 
the  son  will  learn  to  do  this  from  his 
father.  The  very  expression,  to  regard 
them  as  uncircumcised,  suggests  the 
propriety  of  pinching  them  off ;  I  do  not 
say  cutting  them  off,  because  it  is  gen- 
erally the  hand,  and  not  a  knife,  that  is 
employed  in  this  operation.'  Although, 
however,  the  use  of  the  fruit  was  only 
interdicted  for  three  years,  the  produce 
did  not  become  available  to  the  propri- 
etor till  the  fifth  year,  the  first-fruits, 
that  is  those  of  that  year,  being  in  this, 
as  in  other  instances,  one  of  the  dues 
from  which  the  priests  derived  their 
subsistence.  Perhaps  a  moral  intima- 
tion to  the  effect  that  men  were  to  re- 
strain their  appetites,  and  not  to  indulge 
in  premature  gratifications,  was  de- 
signed at  the  same  lime  to  be  conveyed 
in  this  precept.  Thus  this  wondrous 
code  taught  its  subjects  to  find  'ser- 
mons in  trees,'  as  well  as  '  good  in 
every  thing.' 

24.  All  the  fruit  thereof  shall  be  holy 
to  praise  the  Lord.  Heb  fi'i^l^n  r:np 
mn"'^  kodesh  hillulim  laihovah,  holi- 
ness of  praises  to  the  Lord.  That  is, 
shall  be  consecrated  to  the  Lord,  and 
eaten  with  demonstrations  of  joy  and 
praise,  as  Judg.  9.  27,  *  they  made 
praise  ;'  that  is,  they  expressed  their 
joyful  emotions  by  songs  of  praises, 
and  probably  by  dancing,  as  the  Gr,  ren- 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XIX. 


209 


25  And  in  the  fifth  year  shall  ye 
eat  of  the  fruit  thereof,  that  it  may 
yield  unto  you  the  increase  there- 
of; I  am  the  Lord  your  God. 

d  ch.   17.    10,  &c.     Deut.   12.  23.     c  Deut. 

ders  it.    The  phrase  points  to  some- 
what of  more  than  usual  festivity. 

25.  In  the  fifth  year  shall  ye  eat  of 
the  fruit  thereof,  that  it  may  yield  unto 
you  the  increase  thereof.  Heb.  tl^Din^ 
inifljn  d!j^  lehosiph  ICikem  tebudtho, 
to  add  increasingly  to  you  its  product. 
The  intimation  clearly  is,  that  they 
would  be  no  losers  by  waiting  to  the 
fifth  year  for  the  fruit  of  their  trees. 
The  forbearance  would  be  rewarded  by 
the  far  more  abundant  fruitfulness  of 
the  trees  themselves. 

Against  the  eating  of  Blood,  and  va- 
rious Superstitious  Observances. 

26.  Ye  shall  not  eat  any  thing  with 
the  blood.  Heb.  Din  l^  libSHll  Vfi^  lo 
tokelu  al  haddfim,  ye  shall  not  eat  upon 
the  blood.  Gr.  //??  eaders  £T!i  opEojv  eat 
not  upon  the  mountains,  i.  e.  after  the 
manner  of  idolaters  ;  an  erroneous  ren- 
dering, arising  from  the  translators 
having  mistaken  tDTH  hadddm,  blood, 
for  tD^n  harim,  mountains,  1  (r)  for 
T  (d),  as  they  have  done  in  numerous 
other  instances.  The  sense  is  intrinsi- 
cally  good  and  warranted  by  Ezek. 
IS.  6,  but  is  not  the  meaning  here  in- 
tended ;  although  it  is  not  perfectly 
obvious  what  the  true  meaning  really  is. 
The  Rabbinical  commentators  for  the 
most  part,  understand  it,  especially  from 
its  connexion  with  what  follows,  as  a 
prohibition  of  certain  idolatrous  rites 
practised  in  the  religion  of  the  heathen, 
in  which  they  entered  into  communion 
with  demons  by  gathering  the  blood  of 
their  sacrifices  into  a  vessel,  or  a  little 
ho!e  dug  in  the  earth,  and  then  sitting 
round  it,  feeding  upon  the  flesh  of  the 
victims.  But  a  more  probable  interpre- 
tation is  that  suggested  by  the  usage  of 
the  same  phrase,  1  Sam.  14.  33,  '  Then 

18» 


26  ^  d  Ye  shall  not  eat  any  thing 
with  the  blood:  e neither  shall  ye 
use  ehchaatment,  nor  observe 
times. 


18.  10,  11,  14, 
17,  and  21.  6. 


1    Sam.  15.  23.     2  Kings  17. 
2Chron.33.  6.     Mai.  3.  5. 


they  told  Saul,  saying.  Behold,  the  peo- 
ple sin  against  the  Lord,  in  that  they 
eat  u-ith  the  blood  (UIH  ^^  al  haddilm, 
upon  the  blood). ^  What  is  meant  by 
this  we  infer  from  v.  32,  of  the  same 
chapter  ;  '  And  the  people  flew  upon 
the  spoil,  and  took  sheep  and  oxen,  and 
calves,  and  slew  them  upon  the  ground, 
and  the  people  did  eat  them  with  the 
blood  (Qirr  iiy  al  hadddm,  upon  the 
blood).'  From  this  it  would  appear 
that  the  phrase  to  eat  any  thing  upon 
the  blood,  means  to  eat  the  flesh  of  the 
animal  before  it  is  fully  dead,  and  the 
blood  thoroughly  drained  from  it.  Thus 
Maimonides  ;  '  It  is  unlawful  to  eat  of 
a  slain  beast  so  long  as  it  trembleth  ; 
and  he  that  eateth  thereof  before  the 
soul  (life)  of  it  be  gone  out,  transgress- 
eth  against  a  prohibition,  Ye  shall  not 

eat  upon  the  blood.' IT  Neither  shall 

ye  use  enchantments.  Heb.  TJJnSln  fc<^ 
lo  tena'hashu,  ye  shall  not  practice  au- 
gury or  divination.  It  is  the  root  with 
which  Tl^ni  na'hash,  a  serpent,  is  so 
intimately  connected,  and  the  true  force 
of  which  is  elucidated  in  the  Note  on 
Gen.  3.  1.  It  refers  to  the  superstitious 
observance  of  omens,  and  perhaps 
mainly  such  ceremonies  as  were  under- 
stood by  the  term  ophiomancy,  or  divi- 
nation  by  serpents,  similar  to  which 
was  the  art  ofornithomancy,  or  augury 
by  birds.  This  is  Bochart's  opinion, 
who  has  gone  into  the  subject,  as  usual, 

at  great  length. IT  Nor  observe  times. 

Heb.  13313>n  ind  lo  teon'enu.  The  doubt- 
ful  origin  of  the  word  makes  the  sense 
doubtful.  Aben-Ezra  and  many  others 
consider  the  verb  as  a  denominative 
from  the  root  ']jS>  dndn,  a  cloud,  and 
understand  it  here  to  be  equivalent  to 
taking  omens  from  the  aspect  of  the 
clouds,  and  other  celestial  phenomena — 


§10 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


27  f  Ye  shall  not  round  the  cor- 
ners of  your  heads,  neither  shalt 
thou  mar  the  corners  of  thy  beard. 


f  ch.  21.  5. 
15.  2. 


Jer.  9.  26,  and  48.  37 


Isai. 


a  species  of  divination  lo  which  respect 
seems  to  be  had,  Jer.  10.  2,  where  the 
prophet  forbids  the  people  to  be  *  dis- 
mayed at  the  signs  of  heaven,  at  which 
tlie  healhen  are  dismayed.'  To  this 
interpretation  Rosenmuller  gives  the 
preference.  Jarchi,  on  llie  other  hand, 
who  is  followed  by  Fuller  (Miscel. 
Sacr.  1.  1,  c.  16)  gives  the  noun  n;i2> 
onch  as  the  etymon  which  is  defined 
a  set,  fixed,  or  prescribed  time.  The 
phrase,  therefore, '  to  observe  times'  is 
supposed  to  imply  the  noting  of  certain 
days  as  more  lucky  than  others,  and 
selecting  such  as  the  days  on  which  to 
commence  a  journey,  or  undertake  any 
particular  business  or  enterprise.  This 
is  probably  the  true  sense,  whether  the 
etymology  above  suggested  be  correct 
or  not.  about  which  there  is  considerable 
doubt.  We  may  remark  that  the  Gr.  has 
opvidodKo-jriaiade,  signifying  augury  by 
birds  ;  while  the  Syriac  employs  a  term 
implying  fascination  by  the  eye,  as  if 
y'^y  ayin,  eye,  were  the  root.  It  seems 
impossible  to  decide  with  confidence 
the  exact  imjjort.  But  while  v.'e  are 
left  in  doubt  about  the  precise  meaning 
of  a  term,  we  are  at  no  loss  to  discover 
the  general  scope  and  ground  of  the 
precept.  The  giving  heed  to  vain  signs 
and  prognostics,  the  turning  to  the  de- 
lu.sive  arts  of  astrology,  or  fortune-tell- 
ing, would  naturally  beget  a  disregard 
and  a  practical  denial  of  the  doctrine 
of  an  over-ruling  Providence,  wiiich  was 
ever  to  be  an  object  of  cordial  belief 
and  unreserved  trust  to  the  pious  mind. 
27.  Ye  shall  nut  round  the  corners 
of  your  head.  That  is,  shall  not  so 
shave  oflf  the  hair  of  the  head  around 
the  temples  and  behind  the  ears  as  to 
leave  the  head  wholly  bald,  except  a 
dish-like  tuft  upon    the  crf)nn.      This 


28  Ye  shall  not  g  raake  any  cut- 
tings in  your  flesh  for  the  dead,  nor 
print  any  marks  upon  you:  lam 
the  Lord. 

g  ch.  21.  6.  Deut.  14.  1.  Jer.  16.  6,  and 
4S.  37. 


was  in  opposition  to  the  usages  of  the 
heathen.  The  precept  in  the  following 
clause  relative  to  the  beard  is  of  equiv- 
alent  import.  They  were  to  let  it 
grow  equally  over  all  the  lower  part  of 
of  the  face. 

2S.  Ye  shall  not  make  any  cuttings 
in  your  flesh  for  the  dead.  Heb.'L"?^-^ 
lenephesh,  for  a  soul ;  but  this  is  the 
sense  of  the  Heb.  term  in  repealed  in- 
stances, as  Lev.  21,  Num.  6.  6,  Hag. 
2.  13.  They  were  not  to  maim  or  lace- 
rate their  persons  in  any  manner  in 
their  mourning  ceremonies,  as  wiih  tlie 
vain  idea  of  pacifying  or  propitiating 
the  infernal  spirits  in  behalf  of  the  dead, 
a  notion  very  prevalent  among  the 
heathen  idolaters.  Mourning  habits 
they  might  put  on,  if  they  chose,  and, 
with  the  exception  of  the  high-priest, 
rend  their  garments  in  token  of  grief  j 
but  they  were  not  to  disfigure  their 
bodies.  This  would  be  utterly  unbe- 
coming a  people  who  were  instructed  to 
a  belter  knowledge  of  a  future  state  and 
of  the  invisible  world  than  the  ignorant 
heathen  could  be  supposed  to  possess. 

IT  Nor  print  any  marks  upon  you. 

'  This  is  understood  lo  forbid  tlie  prac 
tice  of  tattooing,  that  is,  by  means  of 
colors  rubbed  over  minute  punctures 
made  in  the  skin,  to  impress  certain 
figures  and  characters  on  different  parts 
ol  the  body,  and  which  in  general  re- 
main indelible  throughout  life.  The 
figures  thus  impressed  on  the  arms  and 
breasts  of  our  sailors  will  serve  in  some 
degree  to  indicate  the  sort  of  ornament 
intended.  It  is  well  known  to  be  com- 
mon among  savages  and  barbarians  in 
almost  all  climates  and  countries — the 
aboriginal  inhabitants  of  our  own  coun- 
try  not  excepted,  who,  from  having 
their  naked  bodies  profusely  ornament- 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XIX. 


211 


29   IF  h  Do    not    prostitute    thy 
daughter    to  cause    her   to   be   a 

h  Deut.  23.  17. 


ed,  apparently  in  this  style,  were  de- 
scribed by  the  Romans  as  painted  sav- 
ages.  Il  seems  in  England  to  be  more 
commonly  regarded  as  a  custom  of  sav. 
age  islanders  than  as  any  thing  more. 
Yet  it  is  also  an  Oriental  custom  ;  and 
that  too  among  peoj)le  whose  proximity 
to  the  Hebrews  affords  a  reason  for  the 
interdiction.  The  Bedouin  Arabs,  and 
those  inhabitants  of  towns  who  are  in 
any  way  allied  to  them,  are  scarcely 
less  fond  of  such  decorations  than  any 
islanders  of  the  Pacific  Ocean.  This  is 
particularly  the  case  among  the  females, 
who  in  general  have  their  legs  and  arms, 
their  front  Irom  the  neck  to  the  waist, 
and  even  their  chins,  noses,  lips,  and 
other  prominent  parts  of  the  face  dis- 
figured with  blue  stains  in  the  form  of 
flowers, circles,  bands,  stars,  and  various 
fanciful  figures.  They  have  no  figures 
of  living'  objects,  such  being  forbidden 
by  their  religion  :  neither  do  they  asso- 
ciate any  superstitions  with  them,  so 
far  as  we  were  able  to  ascertain.  They 
probably  did  both  before  the  Moham- 
medan era,  as  their  descendants  in  the 
island  of  Malta  do  at  present.  The 
men  there  generally  go  about  without 
their  jackets, and  with  their  shirt  sleeves 
tucked  up  above  their  elbows,  and  we 
scarcely  recollect  ever  to  have  seen  an 
arm  thus  bare  which  was  not  covered 
with  religious  emblems  and  figures  of 
the  Virgin,  or  of  some  saint  under 
whose  immediate  protection  the  person 
thus  marked  conceived  himself  to  be. 
Thus  also,  persons  who  visit  the  holy 
sepulchre  and  other  sacred  places  in 
Palestine,  have  commonly  a  mark  im- 
pressed upon  the  arm  in  testimony  of 
their  meritorious  pilgrimage.  The 
Hindoos  also  puncture  upon  their  per- 
sons representations  of  birds,  trees,  and 
the  gods  thoy  serve.  Among  them  the 
representations  are  sometimes  of  a 
highly  offensive  description.    All  Hin- 


whore:  lest  the  land  fall  to  whore- 
dom, and  the  land  become  full  of 
wickedness. 


doos  have  a  black  spot,  or  some  other 
mark,  upon  their  foreheads.  It  was 
probably  the  perversion  of  such  figures 
to  superstitious  purposes,  or  being  worn 
in  honor  of  some  idol,  which  occasioned 
them  to  be  interdicted  in  the  text  before 
us — if  such  tattooing  is  really  that 
which  is  here  intended.  As  the  marks 
are  indelible,  we  of  course,  in  taking 
this  view,  consider  that  a  permanent 
fashion  rather  than  a  temporary  mourn- 
ing usage  is  here  prohibited.' — P.  Bib. 

Against  Prostitution. 
29.  Do  nut  prostitute  thy  daughter, 
&c.  Heb.  n^nn  ^K  at  te'haim,  do  not 
make  abominable  or  prof anv.  Gr.  nv  ^tfin- 
Xojcrcii  thou  shalt  not  profane,  desecrate, 
or  pollute.  This  alludes  to  the  abom- 
inable  custom  of  the  heathen,  among 
whom  the  women  prostituted  them- 
selves in  their  temples  as  an  act  of  re- 
ligion. At  Babylon  this  was  done,  ac- 
cording to  Herodotus,  by  women  of  all 
ranks,  before  they  were  married  ;  and 
from  the  following  remarks  of  Mr. 
Roberts  (Orient.  Illust.)  it  appears  that 
the  same  depraved  practice  is  still  kept 
up  in  India. — 'Parents,  in  consequence 
of  a  vow  or  some  other  circumstance, 
often  dedicate  their  daughters  to  the 
gods.  They  are  sent  to  the  temple,  at 
the  age  of  eight  or  ten  years,  to  be  in- 
iiiated  into  the  art  of  dancing  before 
the  deities,  and  of  singing  songs  in 
honor  of  their  exploits.  From  that 
period  these  dancing  girls  remain  in 
some  sacred  building  near  the  temple  ; 
and  when  they  arrive  at  maturity  (the 
parents  being  made  acquainted  with  the 
fact),  a  feast  is  made,  and  the  poor  girl 
is  given  into  the  embraces  of  some  in- 
fluential man  of  the  establishment* 
Practices  of  the  most  disgusting  nature 
then  take  place,  and  the  young  victim 
becomes  a  prostitute  for  life.'  From 
all  such  horrid  abominations  the  sane* 


212 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


30  Hi  Ye  shall  keep  my  sabbaths, 
and  k  reverence  my  sanctuary :  I 
am  the  Lord. 

31  H  •  Regard  not  them  that  have 

i  ver.  3.     ch.  26.  2.     k  Eccles.  5.  1. 

tuaryofGod  was  to  be  kept  free,  and 
all  licentiousness  among  the  people  at 
large  to  be  discouraged  to  the  utmost. 
It  can  hardly  be  supposed  that  any 
parent  would  be  so  far  lost  to  all  the 
instincts  of  natural  affection,  as  know- 
ingly and  of  set  design  to  surrender  a 
beloved  daughter  to  a  life  of  infamy, 
degradation,  and  sin  ;  but  he  might  do 
this  indirectly,  by  not  restraining  her 
from  such  customs  and  associations  as 
would  tend  to  lead  to  it;  and  it  is  the 
usual  idiom  of  the  Scriptures  to  speak 
of  that  as  actually  done  by  a  person 
which  he  does  not  prevent  when  it  was 
in  the  power  of  his  hand  to  do  it. 
Whether  the  prohibition  is  pointed 
against  the  exposing  of  daughters  to 
prostitution  as  a  part  of  religion,  is, 
we  think,  considerably  doubtful,  al- 
though it  may  have  been  so.  But  there 
is  no  room  to  question  that  the  explana- 
tion above  given  is  true  at  any  rate. 
Parents  were  not  to  prostitute  their 
daughters  by  suffering  them  to  he  ex- 
posed to  the  danger  of  prostitution. 

Enjoining  Reverence  of  the   Sabbath 
and  the  Sanctuary. 

30.  Ye  shall  keep  my  sabbaths  and 
reverence  my  sanctuary.  These  pre- 
cepts are  doubtless  here  conjoined  from 
the  intimate  relation  which  the  observ- 
ance of  the  one  has  to  that  of  the  other. 
Neglect  or  profanation  of  the  Sabbath 
not  only  accompanies,  but  in  great  mea- 
sure  consists  in,  the  habitual  disregard 
of  the  worship  of  the  sanctuary. 

Against  consulting  Wizards  and  them 
which  have  Familiar  Spirits. 

31.  Regard  not  them  that  have  fa- 
miliar spirits.  Heb.  r.3i^n  ^5^  I^Sn  ^i^ 
al  tiphnu  el  hdoboth,  turn  not  to  the 


familiar  spirits,  neither  seek  after 
wizards,  to  be  defiled  by  them:  I 
am  the  Lord  your  God. 

1  Exod.  22.  IS.  ch.  20.  6,  27.  Deut.  IS.  10* 
1  Sam.  23.  7.  1  Chron.  10.  13.  Isai.  8.  19- 
Acts  10.  16. 


oboth.  Go  not  after  them  to  consult 
them,  nor  follow  their  directions.  Gr. 
ovK  eiTaKo\ovdr](r€(T6€,  follow  not.  We 
give  the  term  oboth  without  translating, 
because  we  have  no  English  word  that 
precisely  answers  to  it.  Its  literal 
sense  is  that  of  leathern  bottles  or 
water-skins,  which  would  of  course  be 
in  a  state  of  distension  or  swelling  when 
filled  with  water.  This  circumstance 
seems  to  have  been  the  ground  of  the 
application  of  the  term  to  sorcerers, 
necromancers,  or  ventriloquists,  (Gr. 
EyyaoTpuxvQoi^  Speakers  out  of  the  belly), 
who,  in  the  practice  of  their  pretended 
magical  rites  and  incantations,'  and 
while  under  the  alleged  influence  of 
the  inspiring  demon,  became  greatly 
inflated,  and  in  that  state  uttered  their 
oracles,  as  if  the  spirit  himself  spoke 
from  within  them.  The  Chal.  has  ^^12. 
biddin,  pythons,  to  which  we  have  a 
distinct  allusion  Acts  16.16,  'And  it 
came  to  pass  as  we  went  to  prayer,  a 
certain  damsel  possessed  with  a  spirit 
of  divination  (Gr.  -Kvcv^ia  irvdan'o?,  spirit 
of  python),  met  us,'  &c.  Python  was 
a  name  of  Apollo,  and  this  damsel  was 
actuated  as  his  priests  or  priestesses 
were  supposed  to  be  in  delivering  ora- 
cles at  Delphos.  She  was  doubtless 
of  the  class  of  persons  denounced  in 
this  passage.  Grammatically,  we  sup- 
pose, tll^H  oboth  in  this  place  requires 
the  supply  of  the  word  ^>D  baal, 
or  n^S/S  baalath,  master  or  mistress  of 
Ob,  as  it  is  expressed  1  Sam.  28.  7,  in 
respect  to  the  witch  of  Endor,  who  is 
called  :m5i  tl^S'D  baalath  ob,  vxistresi 
of  Ob,  but  translated  in  our  version  one 
that  '  had  a  familiar  spirit.'  So  by  a 
like  figure  of  speech  'spirits'  is  used 
for  '  spiritual  gifts,'  and  for  those  who 
exercise  them,  1  Cor.  14. 12, 32.— 1  John 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XIX. 


213 


32  H  m  Thou  shah  rise  up  before 
the  hoary  head,  and  honour  the 
face  of  the  old  man,  and  n  fear  thy 
God  :  I  am  the  Lord. 

m  Prov.  -lO.  29.     1  Tim.  5.  1.     n  ver.  14. 


4.  1. IT  Neither  seek  after  wizards. 

11  tb.  L"';>""'  yiddeonim ,  knowing  ones, 
Tlie  lenn  in  its  radical  meaning  implies 
knowledge  (from  3>~i  ydda,  to  know), 
and  is  here  applied  to  men  as  the  pre- 
ceding is  to  women.  It  is  agreed  that 
the  word  denotes  generally  those  who, 
by  means  of  magical  and  cabalistic 
arts,  professed  to  become  acquainted 
with  future  events,  to  know  the  good  or 
evil  that  awaited  human  life.  They 
are  joined  with  the  masters  or  possess- 
ors of  '  familiar  spirits '  above-men- 
tioned, as  like  them  in  sin,  and  both 
were  to  be  put  to  death  by  the  magis- 
trate, according  to  ch.  20.  27,  which 
contains  the  penally  of  this  crime.  '  A 
man  also  or  a  woman  that  hath  a  fa- 
miliar spirit,  or  that  is  a  wizard,  shall 
surely  be  put  to  death  :  they  shall  stone 
them  with  stones  :  their  blood  shall  be 
upon  them.'  The  reason  for  this  pre- 
cept's coming  in  juxta-position  with  the 
former  enjoining  reverence  of  the  sanc- 
tuary is  thus  intimated  in  the  paraphrase 
of  R.  Chazkuni : — '  Ye  shall  reverence 
my  sanctuary  ;  therefore  turn  not  to 
them  that  have  familiar  spirits,  nor  to 
wizards  ;  for  what  have  you  to  do  with 
such?  Behold,  you  have  a  sanctuary 
wherein  is  Urim  and  Thummim.' 

Respect  to  be  shown  to  the  Aged. 
32.  Thou  Shalt  rise  up  before  the 
hoary  head.  Heb,  H^'^D  ^2^'i2  mippen't 
shtbdh,  before  the  greyness  or  hoari- 
ness  ;  the  abstract  for  the  concrete,  as 
in  numerous  other  instances.  Chal. 
'  Him  that  is  skilful  in  the  law.'  How 
much  praise  have  the  Spartan  institu- 
lions  justly  obtained  for  cherishing  this 
principle,  yet  how  much  more  energetic 
and  authoritative  is  the  language  of  the 
Jewish  code,  coming  as  it  does  directly 
from  Jehovah  himself!     In  command- 


33  H  And  o  if  a  stranger  sojoura 
with  thee  in  your  land,  ye  shall 
not  vex  him. 


o  Exod.  22.  21,  and  23. 9. 


ing  reverence  to  be  paid  to  the  aged,  he 
in  fact  ordains  it  to  that  which  is  a  feeble 
image  of  his  own  eternity.  He  is  de- 
nominated the  '  Ancient  of  days,'  and 
when  he  is  represented  as  having  '  the 
hair  of  his  head  like  the  pure  wool,'  he 
is  pleased  to  represent  himself  as  hav- 
ing the  distinguishing  characteristic  of 
old  age.  There  is  probably  no  object 
in  creation  so  fitted  to  inspire  reverence 
as  the  sight  of  the  snowy  locks  of  the. 
old  man,  and  consequently  the  duty  here 
enjoined  has  been  recognized  in  all  civi- 
lized nations,  as  one  the  violation  of 
which  is  deserving  of  the  severest  pun- 
ishment. Even  a  heathen  Juvenal  (Sat. 
13.)  could  say — '  Hoc  grande  nefas,  et 
morte  piandum,  si  juvenis  vetulo  non 

assurrexerat.' IF  And  fear  thy  God. 

Heb.  "Iin^i^^a  riJ^I"^  yCiritha  m'eelohekd, 
fear  from  (before)  thy  gods.  That  is, 
as  many  of  the  Jewish  writers  under- 
stand it,  reverence  thy  judges  or  magis- 
trates, who  are  repeatedly  called  C^n^!!^ 
Elohim,  gods,  in  the  sacred  writings. 
They  suppose  accordingly  that  there 
are  three  degrees  or  ranks  of  men  im- 
plied in  this  verse  towards  each  of 
which  becoming  tokens  of  honor  and 
reverence  are  here  expressly  enjoined  ; 
(1.)  the  aged  in  general ;  (2.)  the  wise 
and  learned;  (3.)  judges  and  magis- 
trates. But  if  taken  as  read  in  our 
translation,  it  clearly  shows  how  inti- 
mate is  the  connexion  in  God's  sight, 
between  a  devout  fear  of  himself  and  a 
becoming  reverence  of  those  who  are 
his  most  natural  representatives  to  the 
eyes  of  mortals. 

The  Stranger  not  to  be  oppressed, 

33.  If  a  stranger  sojourn  with  thee  in 

your  land  ye  shall  not  vex  him.     Heb, 

ins<  13iri  itb  io  ionu  otho,  ye  shall  not 

afflict,  oppress  him.  Gr.  ov  dXiipsre  avrov 


214 


LEVITICUS. 


IB.  C.  1490. 


34  pBut  the  stranger  that  dwell- 
elh  with  you,  shall  be  unto  you  as 
one  born  among  you,  and  q  thou 
shalt  love  him  as  thyself;  for  ye 
were  strangers  in  the  land  of 
Egypt :  I  am  the  Lord  your  God. 

35  ^r  Ye  shall  do  no  unrighteous- 
ness in  judgment,  in  mete-yard,  in 
weight,  or  in  measure. 

36  sJust  balances,  just  weights, 

P  Exod.  12. 48,  49.  q  Deut.  10.  19.  r  ver.  15. 
»  Deut.  25.  13,  15.  Prov.  11.  1,  and  16.  11, 
and  20.  10. 


ye  shall  not  afflict  him.  By  the  Targum 
of  Jonathan  and  by  Sol.  Jarchi,  it  is 
understood  of  vexations  of  words,  such 
as  saying  to  him,  '  Yesterday  thou  wast 
an  idolater,  and  now  thou  comest  to 
learn  the  law  which  was  given  from  the 
mouth  of  God.'  It  is  supposed  that  the 
stranger  was  not  an  idolater,  but  a 
worshipper  of  the  God  of  Israel,  though 
not  circumcised  ;  a  proselyte  of  right- 
eousness. If  such  an  one  sojourned 
among  them,  they  must  not  vex  him, 
nor  oppress,  nor  overreach  him  in  a 
bargain,  taking  advantage  of  his  igno- 
rance of  their  laws  and  customs  ;  they 
must  reckon  it  as  great  a  sin  to  cheat  a 
stranger,  as  to  cheat  an  Israelite.  As 
all  men  are  children  of  one  common 
father,  it  argues  a  generous  disposition 
and  a  pious  regard  to  God  to  show  kind- 
ness to  strangers. 

Enjoining  just  Measures,  Weights,  and 
Balances. 
35.  Ye  shall  do  no  unrighteousness 
in  judgment.  The  word  'judgment '  in 
this  connexion  is  very  plausibly  referred 
by  the  Hebrew  writers  to  all  the  par- 
ticulars that  follow.  On  this  construc- 
tion it  is  held,  that  Moses  uses  the  word 
here  in  order  to  intimate  of  what  sol- 
emn moment  he  would  have  the  law 
considered,  which  relates  to  true  mea- 
sures and  weights.  The  man  that  falsi- 
fied either  was  to  be  regarded  as  a 
corrupter  of  judgment,  an  emphatic 
designation,  equivalent  to  vile,  wicked, 


a  just  ephah,  and  a  just  hin  shall 
ye  have  :  I  am  the  Lord  your  God, 
which  brought  you  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt. 
37  t  Therefore  shall  ye  observe  ail 
my  statutes,  and  all  my  judgments, 
and  do  them  :  I  am  the  Lord. 

CHAPTER  XX. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 

t  ch.  13,  4,  5.     Deut.  4.  5,  6,  and  5.  I,  and 
6.  25. 


abominable  in  a  very  high  degree.' 
IT  In  mete-yard.     Heb.  m723  bammid- 
ddh  ;  a  measure  of  length  or  surface, 
such  as  the  yard,  cubit,  foot,  span,  &c. 

IT  In  weight.     Heb.  ^p^72n  ham- 

mishkol ;   such  as  the   talent,  shekel, 

&c. IT  In  measure.    Heb.  n*iTIj^2 

bammesurah ;  by  which  is  denoted 
measures  of  capacity,  such  as  the  ho- 
mer, ephah,  seah,  hin,  &c.  In  all  these 
articles,  as  well  as  in  the  balances  or 
scales,  weight-stones,  &c.,  mentioned 
in  the  next  verse,  they  were  to  observe 
the  most  honest  exactness;  and  never 
allow  themselves  to  practise  any  spe- 
cies of  fraud  in  their  dealings  and  com- 
merce,  because. they  might  not  think  it 
of  easy  detection. 

In  view  of  the  general  contents  of 
this  chapter,  who  can  but  feel  how  ad- 
mirable are  such  language  and  senii 
ments,  and  how  suited  to  the  sacred 
original  from  which  they  flow  !  How 
strongly  do  they  attest  the  divine  be- 
nevolence which  dictated  the  Jewish 
law,  and  the  divine  authority  which 
alone  could  enforce  such  precepts  by 
adequate  sanctions,  and  impress  such 
sentiments  upon  the  human  heart  with 
practical  conviction  ! 


CHAPTER  XX. 
The  principal  scope  of  the  present 
chapter  is  to  specify  the  punishments 
which  it  pleased  God  to  annex  to  the 
transgression  of  the  laws  contained  in 
the  two  preceding  chapters.     As  we 


B.  C.  14900 


CHAPTER  XX. 


215 


2  *  Again  thou  shalt  say  to  the 
children  of  Israel,  ^  Whosoever  he 
be  Gf  the  children  of  Israel,  or  of 
the  strangers  that  sojourn  in  Israel, 
that  giveih  any  of  his  seed  unto 
Molech,  he  shall  surely  be  put  to 

acli.  IS.  21.     b  ch,  18.  21.  Deut.    12.  .31, 

and   18.  10.     2  Kings  17.  17,  and  23.  10.     2 

Chron.  .33.  6.  Jer.  7.  31,  and  32.  35.  Ezek. 
20.  26,  31 

liave  already  had  occasion  to  consider 
most  of  them  in  connexion  with  the 
parallel  precepts  in  ch.  IS,  there  remains 
little  to  be  said  by  way  of  additional 
comment. 

Against  the  giving  of  Seed  to  Molech. 
2.  Whosoever  he  be,  &c.  Heb.  lL''i< 
IIj'^'A  a  man,  a  man.  The  law  had  res- 
pect as  much  to  proselytes  who  had 
embraced  the  Hebrew  faith,  as  to  native 

Israelites. IT  That  giveth  any  of  his 

seed  unto  Molech.  That  is,  any  of  his 
children.    On  the  name  and  character 

of  this  idol,  see  note  on  Lev.  18.  21 . 

^  He  shall  be  surely  put  to  death.  Heb. 
Ti^QT'  ril^  moth  yumSth,  dying  he  shall 
be  made  to  die.     So  afterwards,  in  vv. 

9,  10,  11 ,  12,  &c. IT  The  people  of  the 

land.  That  is,  the  inhabitants  of  that 
region  in  which  he  dwells.     Chal. '  The 

people  of   the    house    of   Israel.' 

^  Shall  stone  him  with  stones.  This 
was  the  principal  capital  punishment  in 
use  among  the  Jews,  and  the  mode  of  it 
was  as  follows  : — When  the  criminal 
arrived  within  four  cubits  of  the  place 
of  execution,  he  was  stripped  naked,  ex- 
cept a  slight  covering  about  the  loins, 
and  his  hands  being  bound,  he  was  led 
up  to  the  fatal  spot,  which  was  an  emi- 
nence about  twice  the  height  of  a  man. 
The  first  executioners  of  the  sentence 
were  the  witnesses,  who  generally  pulled 
off  their  clothes  for  that  purpose.  One 
of  them  threw  him  down  with  great 
violence  upon  his  loins;  if  he  rolled 
upon  his  breast,  he  was  turned  upon  his 
loins  again  ;  and  if  he  died  by  the  fall, 
ih".  sentence  of  the  law  was  executed  : 


death :  the  people  of  the  land  shall 
stone  him  with  stones. 
3  And  c  I  will  set  my  face  against 
that  man,  and  will  cut  him  off 
from  among  his  people  ;  because 
he  hath  given  of  his  seed  unto 
Molech,  to  '•  defile  my  sanctuary, 
and  e  to  profane  my  holy  name. 

c  ch.  17.  10.     d  Ezek.  5.  11,  and  23.  38,  39 
e  ch.  18.  21. 

but  if  not,  the  other  witness  took  a  great 
stone  and  dashed  it  on  his  breast  as  he 
lay  upon  his  back  ;  and  then,  if  he  was 
not  despatched,  all  the  people  that  stood 
by,  threw  stones  at  him  till  he  died. 
-  3.  I  will  set  my  face  against  that  man. 
Heb.  irii^  ettcn,  uill  give  ;  i.  e.  will  op- 
pose, will  fix  firmly  my  face  ;  for  which 
we  have  in  v.  5  another  and  more  appro- 
priate original  word  for  set  (T.T^ilJ 
samti).  It  might  reasonably  be  asked, 
in  what  sense  God  here  threatens  the 
cutting  off  an  offender,  who  is  at  the 
same  time  represented  as  having  been 
stoned  to  death  in  the  preceding  verse. 
To  this  it  is  answered  by  the  Jewish 
critics,  that  the  meaning  is,  that  where 
the  sin  was  not  known,  or  there  was 
not  a  suflicient  amount  of  proof  to  con- 
vict the  offender  of  the  crime,  there 
God  would  interpose,  and  by  his  own 
act '  cut  him  off,'  by  some  extraordinary 
judgment,  from  among  his  people.  But 
as  this  case  would  seem  rather  to  be  in- 
cluded in  that  mentioned  vv.  4,  5,  we 
prefer  to  consider  the  punishment  de- 
nounced in  this  passage  as  identical 
with  the  '  stoning  '  of  v.  2.  The  Most 
High  declares  that  in  this  way  his 
judicial  purpose  shall  be  executed.  The 
threatening  is  of  fearful  import.  That 
infliction  must  be  awful  indeed,  in  which 
the  sufferer  sees  the  human  agents 
merely  carrying  into  effect  a  divine 
sentence  which  decrees  his  destruction. 

IT  To  defile  my  sanctuary  ; — which 

which  was  defiled  when  God  was  pro- 
fessedly worshipped  in  any  ofher  place 
or  in  any  other  manner  than  he  liad 
commanded  ;  or  when  sacrifices  wer« 


S16 


LEVITICUS. 


[-B.  C.  1490. 


4  And  if  the  people  of  the  land 
•lo  any  ways  hide  their  eyes  from 
the  man,  when  hegiveth  of  his  seed 
unlo  Molech,  and  f  kill  him  not ; 

5  'I'hen  §  I  will  set  my  face  against 
ihat  man,  and  h  against  his  family, 
and  will  cut  him  off,  and  all  that 
i  go  a  whoring  after  him,  to  com- 
mit whoredom  with  Molech,  from 
among  their  people. 

I  Deut.  17.  2,  3,  5.  S  ch.  17.  10.  h  Exod. 
20.  5.     i  ch.  17.  7. 

offered  by  his  people  to  false  gods  ;  in- 
asmuch as  the  leinple  of  God  hath  no 

agreement    with    idols. IT    And    to 

profane  my  holy  name.  Heb.  ^^H^ 
le'haUil,  the  same  word  as  that  employ- 
ed Lev.  19.  29,  '  Do  not  prostitute 
(binn  te'hallll)  thy  daughter,'  &c. 
The  name  of  God  is  profaned,  dese- 
crated, made  abominable,  when  the 
honor  and  reverence  due  to  him  alone  is 
lavished  upon  idols.  See  Note  on  Lev. 
18.21. 

4.  If  the  people  of  the  land  do  any 
ways  hide  their  eyes.  Heb.  Q^yn 
l^'^^iS'"!  haH'cm  yaUim,  hiding  do  hide. 
Gr.  i'lrepoxpei  v-epi6u)aiv^  With  winking 
shall  wink  at ;  i.  e.  shall  overlook,  dis- 
regard, neglect  to  punish.  The  Gr. 
word  is  the  same  with  that  occurring, 
Acts  17.  30, '  And  the  times  of  this  ig- 
norance God  winked  at  (vTTfjOtJwi'),  but 
now  commandeih,'  &c. 

5.  Then  I  unll  set  my  face,  he.  Chal. 
'  I  will  set  mine  anger  against  that  man 
and  his  helpers.'  Because  others  might 
wickedly  connive  at  his  offence,  let  him 
not  therefore  promise  himself  impunity. 
The  eye  of  Omniscience  would  still  be 
upon  him,  and  the  hand  which  no  power 
could  slay  or  elude  would  single  him 
out  for  its  stroke  ;  and  not  him  only, 
but  the  judgment,  according  to  the  usual 
analogy  of  Providence,  would  embrace 
the  circle  of  his  family,  and  involve 
others  in  its  desolating  effects.     See 

Note  on  Joshua,  7.  15. IT  His  family. 

Gr.  rr)v  avyyevEiav  avrov,  his  kindred, 
IT  All  that  go  a  whoring  after  him. 


I    6  II  And   kthe  soul  that  turneil] 

I  after  such  as  have  familiar  spirits, 

j  and  after  wizards,  to  go  a  whoring 

after  them,  I  will  even  set  my  face 

against  that  soul,  and  will  cut  him 

off  from  among  his  people. 

7  H  J  Sanctify  yourselves  there- 
fore and  be  ye'  holy :  for  I  am  the 
Lord  your  God. 

8  m  And  ye  shall  keep  my  statutes, 

kch.  19.  31.  Ich.  11.44,  and  19.  2.  1  Pet. 
1.  16.     m  ch.  19.  .37. 


Chal.  '  All  who  err  after  him  ;'  the  usual 
term  for  expressing  idolatrous  apostacy 
in  that  version.  Gr.  -avras  rovs  b^iovo- 
ovvrai  avToy,  all  who  consent  with  him. 
The  language  is  founded  upon  the  pe- 
culiarly near  and  intimate  relation, 
amounting  in  fact  to  a  kind  of  conjugal 
union,  between  God  and  his  covenant 
people,  an  infraction  of  which  on  their 
part  was  a  virtual  act  of  adultery. 

Of  consulting  Wizards. 

6.  The  soul  that  turneth  after  such 
as  have  familiar  spirits,  &c.  The  na- 
ture of  the  sin  here  alluded  to  has  been 
already  explained.  Lev.  19,  31.  The 
punishment  denounced  is  the  same  ju- 
dicial '  cutting  off'  which  we  have  be- 
fore had  frequent  occasion  to  consider, 
and  of  which  a  fuller  exposition  will  be 
found  in  the  Note  on  Gen.  17.  14.  The 
case  of  Saul  affords  a  melancholy  in- 
stance of  the  execution  of  this  fearful 
sentence  ;  1  Chron.  10.  13,  14,  '  And 
Saul  died  for  his  transgression  which 
he  committed  against  the  Lord,  even 
against  the  word  of  the  Lord,  which  he 
kept  not,  and  also  for  asking  counsel  of 
one  that  had  a  familiar  spirit,  to  inquire 
of  it ;  and  inquired  not  of  the  Lord  ; 
therefore  he  slew  him,  and  turned  the 
kingdom  unto  David.'  As  the  act  for- 
bidden was  in  its  own  nature  idolatrous, 
it  is  characterized  by  the  same  oppro- 
brious term  as  that  which  is  applied  in 
the  preceding  verse  to  the  service  of 
Molech. 

7.  Sanctify  yourselves  therefore,  &c. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XX. 


217 


and  do  them :  « I  «m  the  Lord 
which  sanctify  you. 

9^0  For  every  one  that  curseth 
his  father  or  his  mother,  shall  be 
surelyput  to  death  :  he  hath  cursed 
his  father  or  his  mother:  phis 
blood  shall  be  upon  him. 

10  H  And  q  the  man  that  comrait- 


"  Exod.  31.  13.  ch.  21.  8.  Ezek.  37  28. 
"  Exod.  21.  17.  Deut.  27.  16.  Prov.  20.  20. 
Matt.  15.  4.  P  ver.  11,  12,  13,  16,  27.  2  Sam. 
I.  16.  q  ch,  18.  20.  Deut,  22.  22.  John  8. 
4,  5, 


This  is  not  properly  to  be  regarded  as 
a  separate  and  independent  precept,  but 
raiher  as  an  appendix  to  the  preceding. 
The  sanctity  especially  enjoined  upon 
the  chosen  people  consisted  in  great 
measure  in  their  separation  from  the 
corrupt  and  idolatrous  practices  of  the 
surrounding  heathen  ;  and  nothing  was 
!Tiore  natural  than  that  such  an  injunc- 
tion should  follow  in  close  connexion  a 
precept  expressly  denouncing  a  particu- 
lar form  of  idolatrous  usage.  It  is  as 
if  he  had  said,  '  Instead  of  conforming 
to  these  abominable  and  wicked  rites, 
and  thus  contaminating  yourselves  with 
the  guilt  of  necromancy  and  other  ma- 
gical arts,  sanctify  yourselves,  i.  e.  keep 
yourselves  aloof  from  all  fellowship 
with  these  works  of  iniquity ;  remember 
that  ye  are  called  to  be  a  chosen  and 
holy  and  peculiar  people,  for  the  Lord 
your  God,  whose  ye  are,  is  a  holy  God, 
infinitely  separated  from  all  these  lying 
vanities  which  the  heathen  worship  as 
gods.' 

Of  cursing  Parents. 
9.  For  every  one  that  curseth  his 
father  or  his  mother,  &c.  Heb.  ^^p"! 
yekallel ;  of  the  genuine  force  of  this 
word  which  radically  signifies  to  make 
li^ht  of,  and  refers  to  any  kind  of  speech 
which  has  a  tendency  to  lessen  our  pa- 
rents in  the  eyes  of  others,  or  in  any 
way  to  bring  contempt  upon  them.  See 
what  is  said  in  the  Note  on  tJie  fifth 
commandment,  Ex.  20.  12.  The  verse 
19 


teth  adultery  with  another  man's 
wife,  even  he  that  committeth 
adultery  with  his  neighbour's  wife, 
the  adulteirer  and  the  adulteress 
shall  surely  be  put  to  death. 

11  r  And  the  man  that  lieth  with 
his  father's  wife,  hath  uncovered 
his  father's  nakedness:  both  of 
them  shall  surely  be  put  to  death : 
their  blood  shall  be  upon  them. 

12  sAnd  if  a  man  lie  with  his 
daughter-in-law,  both  bf  them  shall 

r  ch.  18.   8.     Deut.  27.   23.     s  ch.   18.    15. 


is  introduced  by  the  illative  *  for '  as 
indicative  of  its  close  connexion  with 
the  precept  contained  in  the  preceding 
verse  ;  '  Be  ye  holy,  and  keep  all  my 
statutes,  or  otherwise  my  judgments 
will  fall  upon  you,  for  every  one  that 
curseth,  &c.,  shall  be  surely  put  to 
death  ;'  or  as  the  Heb.  has  it,  fiTZl"^  THTa 
moth  yumath,  dying  shall  be  made  to 
die.  The  precise  mode  of  execution  is 
not  specified,  but  it  is  understood  to  be 
by  stoning.  This  form  of  capital  pun- 
ishment is  uniformly  to  be  understood 

where  no  other  is  stated. IT  He  hath 

cursed  his  father  or  his  mother.  This 
is  repeated  as  by  a  kind  of  note  of  ex- 
clamation, to  aggravate  the  enormity 
of  the  crime.  He  shall  be  put  to  death, 
for,  with  utter  amazement  be  it  said, 
he  hath  cursed  his  father  or  his  mo- 
ther !  !  such  a  monster  must  surely  die. 

IT  His  blood    shall   be    upon  him. 

That  is,  he  shall  be  put  to  death  as  a 
malefactor  justly  condemned  to  die  ; 
one  who  has  brought  his  guilt  upon  his 
own  head,  and  who  can  blame  none  but 
himself  for  the  consequences.  Chal. 
'  He  is  guilty  of  death,'  i.  e.  worthy  to 
be  killed.  Gr.  evoxoi  ecrrai,  he  shall  be 
guilty.  The  death  in  this  and  all  such 
cases  was  stoning.  '  Every  place  where 
it  is  said  in  the  law,  '  they  shall  be  put 
to  death  ;  their  blood  (be)  upon  them,' 
it  is  meant,  by  stoning.' — Maimonidet 
in  Ainsworth. 

10.  See  on  Lev.  18.  20. 

11.  See  on  Lev.  18.8. 


218 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490 


surely  be  put  to  death  :  t  they  have 
wrought  confusion ;  their  blood 
shall  be  upon  them. 

13  ulf  a  man  also  lie  with  man- 
kind, as  he  lieth  with  a  woman, 
both  of  them  have  committed  an 
abomination  :  they  shall  surely  be 
put  to  death  ;  their  blood  shall  be 
upon  them. 

14  X  And  if  a  man  take  a  wife  and 
her  mother,  it  is  wickedness  :  they 
shall  be  burnt  with  fire,  both  he 
and  they :  that  there  be  no  wick- 
edness among  you. 

15  y  And  if  a  man  lie  with  a 
beast,  he  shall  surely  be  put  to 
death  :  and  ye  shall  slay  the  beast. 

16  And  if  a  woman  approach  unto 
any  beast,  and  lie  down  thereto, 
thou  shalt  kill  the  woman  and  the 
beast ;  they  shall  surely  be  put  to 
death;  their  blood  shall  be  upon 
them. 

17  z  And  if  a  man  shall  take  his 
sister,  his  father's  daughter,  or  his 
mother's  daughter,  and  see  her  na- 
kedness, and  she  see  his  nakedness : 

t  ch.  18  23.  u  ch.  18.  22.  Dent.  23.  17. 
See  Gen.  19.  5.  Judg.  19.  22.  x  ch.  18.  17. 
Deut.  27.  23.  y  ch.  IS.  23.  Deut.  27.  21. 
z  ch.  IS.  9.     Deut.  27.  22.     See  Gen.  20.  12. 

12.  See  on  Lev.  18.  15. 

13.  See  oh  Lev.  IS.  22. 

14.  See  on  Lev.  18.   17. IT  They 

shall  be  burnt  with  fire.  That  is,  after 
being  stoned.     See  Note  on  Josh.  7.  15. 

15.  16.  See  on  Lev.  18.  23. 

17.  See  on  Lev.  18.  9. 

18.  See  on  Lev.  18.  19. 

19.  See  on  Lev.  18.  12. 

20.  See  on  Lev.  18.  14. 

21.  See  on  Lev.  18.  16. IT  They 

shall  be  childless.  '  This  does  not 
mean,'  saysMichaelis,  *  that  God  would 
miraculously  prevent  the  procreation  of 
children  from  such  a  marriage  ;  for  God 
no  where  promises  any  continual  mira- 
cle of  this  nature ;  but  only  that  the 
children  proceeding  from  it  should  not 
be  put  to  their  account  in  the  public 
registers ;  so  that  in  a  civil  sense  they 


it  is  a  wicked  thin©' ;  and  they  shall 
be  cut  off  in  the  sight  of  their  peo- 
ple :  he  hath  uncovered  his  sister's 
nakedness ;  he  shall  bear  his  in- 
iquity. 

18  a  And  if  a  man  shall  lie  with 
a  woman  having  her  sickness,  and 
shall  uncover  her  nakedness ;  he 
hath  discovered  her  fountain,  and 
she  hath  uncovered  the  fountain 
of  her  blood  :  and  both  of  them 
shall  be  cut  off  from  among  their 
people. 

19  b  And  thou  shalt  not  uncover 
the  nakedness  of  thy  mother's  sis- 
ter, nor  of  thy  father's  sister:  c  for 
he  uncovereth  his  near  kin  :  they 
shall  bear  their  iniquity. 

20  '^  And  if  a  man  shall  lie  with 
his  uncle's  wife,  he  hath  uncov- 
ered his  uncle's  nakedness :  they 
shall  bear  their  sin  :  they  shall  die 
childless. 

21  e  And  if  a  man  shall  take  his 
brother's  wife,  it  is  an  unclean 
thing :  he  hath  uncovered  his  bro- 
ther's nakedness;  they  shall  be 
childless. 

22  ^  Ye  shall  therefore  keep  all 

a  ch.  18.  19.  See  ch.  15.  24.  b  ch.  IS,  12, 
13.     c  ch.  18.  6.     d  ch.  18.  14.     e  ch.    18.    16. 


would  be  childless.  The  Heb.  word 
'^"iT^S''  ariri,  unfruitful,  has  this  mean- 
ing,  and  is  applied  to  the  case  of  a  man 
who  has  children,  but  will  not  be  heired 
by  them.  Thus  in  Jer.  22.  30,  it  is  said 
of  a  king  who  certainly  had  children, 
though  they  did  not  receive  his  inherit- 
ance, '  Inscribe  this  man  as  childless  ; 
for  of  his  posterity  none  shall  prosper, 
nor  any  sit  upon  the  throne  of  David.' 
For  the  children  of  such  a  marriage 
would  be  ascribed  to  the  deceased  bro- 
ther; and  that,  among  the  Israelites, 
where  a  man  made  so  much  of  the  honor 
of  being  called  father,  was  a  very  sen- 
sible punishment.  The  lxx,  Augus- 
tine, and  Aben-Ezra,  understood  our 
text  in  this  manner.' — Comment  on  L. 
of  M.  §  116.  It  must  be  admitted  to 
be  not  a  little  remarkable,  that  God 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXI. 


219 


my  f statutes,  and  all  my  judg- 
ments, and  do  them  :  that  the  land 
whither  I  bring  you  to  dwell  there- 
in, g  spue  you  not  out. 

23  h  And' ye  shall  not  walk  in 
the  manners  of  the  nations  which 
I  east  out  before  you:  for  they 
committed  all  these  things,  and 
'therefore  I  abhorred  them. 

24  But  1^1  have  said  unto  you. 
Ye  shall  inherit  their  land,  and  I 
will  give  it  unto  you  to  possess 
it,  a  land  that  floweih  wath  milk 
and  honey :  I  am  the  Lord  your 
God,  J  which  have  separated  you 
from  other  people. 

25  m  Ye  shall  therefore  put  dif- 

f  ch  13.  26,  and  19.  37.  S  ch.  18.  25,  28. 
i'  ch  13.  3,  24,  .30.  '  ch.  18.  27.  Deut.  9.  5. 
k  Exod.  3.  17,  and  6.  8.  1  ver.  26.  Exod.  19. 
6,  and  33.  16.  Deut.  7.  6,  and  14.  2.  1  Kings 
8.  53,     m  ch.  11.  47.     Deut.  14.  4. 


should  here  threaten  a  punishment  to 
be  intlicted  by  his  own  special  inlerpo- 
sitioii,  when  in  every  other  case  men- 
tioned he  ordered  it  to  be  done  by  the 
agency  of  the  magistrate.  This  gives 
considerable  plausibility  to  the  sugges- 
tion above  quoted  ;  viz.  that  their  child- 
reti  should  be  bastardized  ;  at  the  same 
time,  we  cannot  perceive  that  the  case 
allows  of  so  much  positiveness  of  tone 
as  is  evident  in  the  language  of  Mi- 
chaelis. 

Exhortations  to  Obedience. 
23.  They  committed  all  these  things, 
and  therefore  I  abhorred  them.  Heb. 
C3  fpitl  vd-dkutz  bdm,  and  I  u-as 
vexed  with  them.  Ainsworth;  'I  am 
irked  with  them.'  Chal.  '  My  Word 
abhorreth  them.'  The  language  em- 
ployed has  a  fearful  emphasis  of  import. 
It  is  much  for  the  infinite  Jehovah  to 
say  that  he  will  punish  men  for  their 
transgressions  ;  but  for  him  to  say  that 
he  abhors  them,  that  they  are  an  offence 
and  an  abomination  to  him,  is  calculated 
rot  only  to  give  us  a  most  affecting-  idea 
of  the  halefulness  of  their  sin,  but  also  of 
ttie  degree  of  their  punishment.     For 


ference  between  clean  beasts  and 
unclean,  and  between  unclean 
fowls  and  clean :  «  and  ye  shall  not 
make  your  souls  abominable  by 
beast  or  by  fowl,  or  by  any  man- 
ner of  living  thing  that  creepeth 
on  the  ground,  which  I  have  sepa- 
rated from  you  as  unclean. 

26  And  ye  shall  be  holy  unto  me  : 
o  for  I  the  Lord  am  holy,  and 
p  have  severed  you  from  othci'  peo- 
ple, that  ye  should  he  mine, 

27  ^  q  A  man  also  or  a  woman 
that  hath  a  familiar  spirit,  or  that 
is  a  wizard,  shall  surely  be  put  to 
death  :  they  shall  stone  them  with 
stones:  r  their  blood  shall  be  upon 
them. 

nch.  11.  43.  0  ver.  7.  ch.  19.  2.  1  Pet. 
1.16.  P  ver.  24.  Tit.  2.  14.  q  ch.  19.  31. 
Exod  22.  18.  Deut.  18.  10,  11.  1  Sam.  23. 
7,  8.     r  ver.  9. 


when  the  emotion  in  the  divine  mind  is 
abhorrence,  what  must  be  the  action  of 
thedivine  judgments?  It  will  be  seen  that 
the  great  argument  by  which  the  pecu- 
liar  people  are  urged  to  obedience  is 
the  fact  that  they  had  been  separated 
by  a  kind  of  holy  external  sequestra- 
tion from  all  other  people,  and  they 
were  consequently  in  like  manner  to  be 
separated  by  a  pre-eminent  sanctity  of 
life,  spirit,  and  demeanor.  Their  con- 
duct was  to  correspond  with  their  dis- 
tinction, and  if  God  says  by  the  prophet 
(Is.  49.  2),  'Thou  art  my  servant,  0 
Israel,  I  will  be  glorious  in  thee,'  they 
were  so  to  govern  their  deportment  as 
to  verify  the  declaration.  And  surely 
when  the  Most  High  makes  his  people 
the  depositaries  of  his  glory,  they  have 
a  motive  to  obedience  than  which  it  is 
impo.ssible  to  conceive  any  stronger. 

CHAPTER  XXI. 

Rules  regulating  the  Priests' Mourning. 
As  the  two  or  three  previous  chapters 
contain  a  mass  of  general  rules  enjoin- 
ing  sanctity  upon  the  people  at  large, 
we  have  here  a  special  law  pertainmg 


m 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

AND  ihe  LojiD  said  unto  Mo- 
ses, Speak  unto  the  priests 
the  sons  of  Aaron,  and  say  unto 
them,  a  There  shall  none  be  defiled 
for  the  dead  among  his  people: 

a  Ezek.  44.  25. 

to  the  priests.  As  it  was  their  office  to 
make  atonement,  and  see  to  the  general 
purity  of  the  people,  it  was  important 
that  they  should  study  the  greatest  de- 
gree of  personal  purity  themselves. 
The  special  ministers  of  the  Most  High 
were  to  keep  themselves  at  a  distance 
from  every  thing  that  savored  in  the 
least  of  uncleanness  in  the  estimation 
of  the  people,  lest  they  should  counte- 
nance that  which  they  were  set  apart  to 
prevent. 

1.  There  shall  none  be  defiled  for  the 
dead.  Heb.  'C£3p  lenephesh  ;  a  term 
in  repeated  instances  applied  to  a  dead 
body.  Gr.  ev  rats  i^u^aij,  for  souls. 
The  spirit  of  the  passage  forbids  that 
any  priest  should  assist  at  laying  out  a 
dead  body,  or  preparing  it  for  interment. 
This  defilement  was  contracted  not  only 
by  touching  a  dead  body,  but  by  coming 
into  a  tent  or  house  where  a  dead  body 
lay,  by  touching  the  grave,  or  by  bear- 
ing the  dead.  In  such  a  case  they  be- 
came  legally  polluted  for  the  space  of 
seven  days,  Num.  19.  11,  14,  and  conse- 
quently disqualified  for  the  service  of 
God,  and  interdicted  from  converse  with 
their  fellow  Israelites.  According  to 
the  Heb.  canons,  this  effect  followed  if 
one  came  within  four  cubits,  or  six  feet, 
of  the  dead.  Of  the  reasons  of  this  pro- 
hibition, it  may  not  be  possible  to  speak 
with  assurance.  Leclerc  observes, 
'  Perhaps  the  chief  reason  why  a  human 
corpse  was  adjudged  to  be  unclean  was, 
because  it  speedily  becomes  putrid, 
especially  in  a  hot  climate ;  whence 
those  who  aspired  to  a  special  clean- 
ness above  others,  abstained  from  any 
contact  with  it.'  Bochart  has  collected 
a  large  mass  of  evidence  to  prove  that 
the  ancient  Greeks  and  Romans  held 


2  But  for  his  kin,  thai  is  near  unto 
him,  that  is,  for  his  mother,  and  for 
his  father,  and  for  his  son,  and  for 
his  daughter,  and  for  his  brother, 

3  And  lor  his  sister  a  virgin,  that 
is  nigh  unto  him,  which  hath  had 


that  defilement  was  contracted  from  the 
same  source. 

2.  But  for  his  kin  that  is  near  unto 
him.  Heb.  11^54  ^'^pn  T-iJ^r:"^  lishiro 
hakkarob  ilauv,  his  remainder  (of flesh) 
that  is  near  unto  him  See  the  import 
of  this  term  explained  in  the  Note  on 
Lev.  18.  6.  Compare  also  Ezek.  44.  25. 
The  rule  here  laid  down  constitutes,  of 
course,  an  exception  to  the  general 
statute,  founded  upon  a  kind  regard  to 
the  natural  sympathies  which  grow  out 
of  the  various  tender  relationships  of 
life.  It  would  have  been  an  extreme 
privation  for  one  of  llie  priestly  order 
to  have  been  prohibited  from  paying  the 
last  offices  of  afieclion  to  a  parent,  a 
child,  a  brother,  or  sister.  It  is  a  beau- 
tiful exemplification  of  the  great  prin- 
ciple that  God  would  '  have  mercy  and 
not  sacrifice,'  where  the  claims  of  both 
came  in  competition.  The  wife,  it  will 
be  seen,  is  not  expressly  mentioned  in 
this  catalogue  of  kindred,  but  that  she 
was  included  by  implication,  no  one 
can  doubt.  And  this,  by  the  way, 
affords  a  strong  confirmation  of  the  prin- 
ciple we  have  before  insisted  upon  in 
the  interpretation  of  the  marriage-laws, 
in  Lev.  18.,  that  the  implied  cases  are 
equally  forbidden  with  the  express. 
The  case  of  the  prophet  Ezekiel,  ch. 
24.  16-18,  is  here  directly  in  point.  It 
was  no  doubt  in  virtue  of  an  express 
command,  suspending  for  the  time  being 
the  operation  of  this  law,  that  he 
was  forbidden  to  exhibit  the  usual  sig- 
nals of  mourning  for  his  deceased  wife, 
which  would  otherwise  have  been  law- 
ful for  him. 

3.  Which  hath  had  no  husband. 
Whereas,  had  she  been  married,  it 
would  have  been  the  duty  of  the  sur- 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXI. 


221 


no  husband :  for  her  may  he  be 
defiled. 

4  But  he  shall  not  defile  himselt, 
being  a  chief  man  among  his  peo- 
ple, "to  profane  himself. 

5  b  They  shall  not  make  baldness 

b  ch.  19.  -27,  28.   Deut.  14.  1.   Ezek.  44.  20. 


upon  their  head,  neither  shall  they 
shave  off  the  corner  of  their  beard, 
nor  make  any  cuttings  in  their  flesh. 
6  They  shall  be  holy  unto  their 
God,  and  c  not  profane  the  name  of 
their  God:  for  the  offerings  of  the 


c  ch.  13.  21,  and  19.  12. 


viving  husband  to  see  to  the  perform- 
ance of  all  the  requisite  rites  at  her 
burial,  so  that  the  priest  her  brother 
would  have  been  excused. 

4.  He  shall  not  defile  himself  being  a 
chief  vian   among  his  people,      Heb. 
1"?:;>3  ^>'3  baal  beammauv,  which  (by 
supplying   the   probable    ellipsis   of  ^ 
for) ,  may  be  rendered  '  for  a  chief  man.' 
Chal.  &^r:i  rabba,  a  master.    That  is, 
he  shall  not  thus  defile  himself  for  any 
one  that   is  not   near  of  kin  to  him, 
though  the  dead  person  were  a  chief  or 
the  ciiiefest  man  among  his  people,  even 
the   high  priest  himself.     This  is  the 
version  of  the  Vulg.  Syr.  and  Arab.,  and 
is  adopted  by  Ains worth,  Gill,  Patrick, 
Dalhe,  Scolt,   A.   Clarke,   and   others. 
The  Gr.  has  strangely  e^amva,  suddenly, 
which  has  probably  arisen  from  some 
blunder  in  the  reading  of  the  original. 
As  ^SJQ  baal  signifies  in  general  a  lord, 
master,   possessor,   and    is   sometimes 
applied  to  '  master  of  a  house,'  the  idea 
of    Willet    is     not    improbable,    who 
thinks  the  meaning  to  be,  that  the  priest, 
the  master  of  the  house,  should  mourn 
for  none  of  the  inmates  except  those 
mentioned  above.     Accordingly  Luther 
renders  it, '  He  shall  not  defile  himself 
for  any  one  who  belongs  to  him.     The 
marginal  reading  which    Rosenmuller 
after  Leclerc  adopts,  gives  entirely  ano- 
ther complexion  to  the  passage  ; — '  Be- 
ing a  husband  among   his  people,  he 
shall  not  defile  himself  (for  his  wife),' 
&c.     This  makes  it  an  express  prohibi- 
tion of  mourning  for  a  wife,  for  which 
construction   we  can  perceive  no  ade- 
quate grounds  either  in  the  nature  of  the 
case  or  the  structure  of  the  passage. 
But  the  matter  is  not  of  sufficient  mo- 
ment to  warrant  an   extruded  critical 


discussion.  We  on  the  whole  prefer  the 
interpretation  suggested  by  Willet,  and 
confirmed  by  Luther. 

6.  They  shall  not  make  baldness  on 
their  heads,  &c.    This  was  enacted  that 
they  might  not  adopt  the  customs  of 
the  heathen,  of  whom  it  is  said  in  the 
apocryphal  book  of  Baruch,  6.  31,  that 
'  their  priests  sit  in  their  temples,  with 
their  clothes  rent,  and  their  heads  and 
beards  shaven,  and  having  nothing  upon 
their  heads  ;  and  they  roar  and  cry  be- 
fore their  gods,  as  men  do  at  the  feast 
where   is  dead.'      See    Note    on   Lev. 
19.  27,  2S.   '  In  ch.  19.  2S,  this  is  made  a 
general  law,  not  peculiar  to  the  priests. 
They  are   here  forbidden    to  do  that 
which  had  already   been  prohibited  to 
the  people  in  general.    There  is  a  dif- 
ference of  opinion  as  to  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  text.    Some  think  that  it  is 
to  be  understood  generally,  as  interdict- 
ing the  shaving  of  the  beard.     If  thus 
understood,  there    seems  an  adequate 
reason  for  it  in  the  contrary  practice  of 
the  Egyptians,   who  did    shave    their 
beards  ;  and  its  repetition  to  the  priests 
may  have  been  to  show  them  that  they 
were  not  exempted   from   the   general 
law,  as  they  might  have  been  led   to 
conclude  from  having  observed  the  pe- 
culiar    scrupulosity    of   the    Egyptian 
priests  on  this  point,  who,  as  we  are 
informed  by  Herodotus,  were  particu- 
larly careful  to  shave  all  the   hair  off 
their  bodies  every  third  day.    The  other 
alternative  is  that  which  has  the  sanc- 
tion of  our  translation,  and  by  which  it 
appears  we  are  to  understand  the  whis- 
kers, or  upper  extremities  of  the  beard. 
The  object  would  then  appear  to  be  to 
keep  them  a  distmct  people  from  the 
Arabs,  wlio  either  shaved  their  whis- 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


Lord  made  by  fire,  and  ^  the  bread 
of  their  God  they  do  offer :  there- 
fore they  shall  be  holy. 
7  e  They  shall  not   take  a  wife 

d  See  ch.  3.  11.    e  Ezek.  44.  22. 

leers  or  cropped  them  short.  We  must 
not  forget  that  it  was  one  great  object 
of  many  of  the  Mosaic  laws  to  keep  the 
Israelites  separate  from  all  the  neigh- 
boring nations  ;  and,  whether  the  Egyp- 
tians or  the  Arabs  were  in  view,  it  is 
certain  that  a  different  fashion  of  the 
beard  would  have  a  more  marked  effect 
in  assisting  such  a  distinction  than  can 
be  readily  calculated  by  those  who  hold 
that  appendage  in  light  esteem.  That 
such  a  distinction  as  we  have  mentioned 
did  exist,  is  not  only  manifested  by 
existing  usages,  but  by  ancient  accounts. 
Mohammed  perceived  the  effect  of  this 
distinction — for  many  Jews  resided  in 
Arabia  in  his  time — and  strictly  en- 
joined that  it  should  be  kept  up.  Ac- 
cording to  the  traditions,  he  used  to  clip 
his  own  whiskers  ;  and  frequently  said, 
'  He  who  does  not  lessen  his  whiskers 
is  not  our  ways  :'  and  he  expressly  said 
that  he  inculcated  this  practice  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  Jews,  who  were  not  accus- 
tomed to  clip  either  their  beards  or 
whiskers.  In  these  counter  regulations 
we  seem  here  to  perceive  the  object  of 
the  apparently  trivial  injunction  of  the 
Hebrew  legislator.' — Pict.  Bib. 

6.  The  offerings  of  the  Lord  made  by 
fire  and  the  bread  of  their  God,  do  they 
offer.  Heb.  CnM^Ji  tH^  nin"^  ^Xi^ 
ishe  Yehovuh  le'hem  eloh'them,  the  fire- 
(offerings)  of  Jehovah,  (even)  the  food 
of  their  God.  Thus  by  a  bold  figure 
of  speech  are  the  sacrificial  offerings 
denominated,  which  were  devoured  by 
fire  to  the  honor  of  God,  and  nothing 
could  well  be  said  tending  to  give  a 
higher  idea  of  their  office,  or  conse- 
quently to  impose  upon  them  more  sol- 
emnly the  duty  of  an  exemplary  sanc- 
tity in  all  their  deportment.  As  the 
Israelites  in  general  were  separated 
from  all  other  nations  to  be  an  holy 


that  is  a  whore,  or  profane ;  neither 
shall  they  take  a  woman  f put  away 
from  her  husband :  for  he  is  holy 
unto  his  God. 

f  See  Deut.  24.  1,  2. 


people  lo  the  Most  High,  so  the  priests 
and  Levites  were  in  a  manner  separated 
from  the  rest  of  the  Israehtes  with  a 
like  intent. 

Restrictions  in  respect  to  a  Priest's 
marrying. 
7.  They  shall  not  take  a  wife,  &c. 
The  two  words  in  the  original  are  n2T 
zonah,  and  nb^ilhallalah,  of  which  the 
latter,  rendered  profane,  signifies,  ac- 
cording to  the  Jews,  not  so  much  one 
that  had  been  profaned  or  dishonored, 
in  which  case  it  would  not  difier  essen- 
tially from  the  preceding,  as  one  who 
was  born  of  such  a  marriage  as  was  for- 
bidden to  the  priests.  For  as  it  ap- 
pears from  V.  9,  that  a  daughter  might 
profane  her  father,  so  a  parent,  on  the 
other  hand,  might  profane  a  daughter, 
and  so  disqualify  her  from  marrying  a 
priest.  The  daughter  of  a  widow  by  a 
high  priest,  for  example,  would  come 
under  this  denomination  (v.  14)  and  so 
also  the  daughter  of  a  divorced  woman, 
by  the  present  verse.  As  the  Gr.,  how- 
ever, has  0c0n\(x>i^Ltvrjv,  profaned,  a  sense 
quite  as  probable  is,  one  that  has  been 
violated  against  her  will,  and  that  is  not 
a  voluntary  prostitute,  like  the  n2T  zo- 
nah. The  use  of  the  epithet  carries 
with  it  the  striking  implication  that 
chastity  invests  the  person  willi  a  pe- 
culiar sacredness,  and  that  it  cannot  be 
lost  without  the  desecration  and  profa- 
nation of  that  which  is  in  a  sense  holy, 
like  a  consecrated  temple. IT  A  wo- 
man put  away.  Heb.  n'»r"l*l3  n^i? 
ishclh  gerushuh,  a  woman  driven  away. 
Gr.  EKi3£0)^ri[j£vT,v,  cast  out.  The  Heb. 
term  is  stronger  than  that  (nVi)!^  "le* 
s/ja/a'/i)  which  is  usually  applied  to 
the  simple  dismission  involved  in  di. 
vorce.  Yet  there  is  no  doubi  thai  the 
'  putting  away'  here  mentioned,  was  by 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXI. 


223 


8  Thou  shalt  sanctify  him  there- 
fore, for  he  offereth  the  bread  of 
thy  God  :  he  shall  be  holy  unto 
thee :  g  for  I  the  Lord  which  sanc- 
tify you,  am  holy. 

S  ch.  iO.  7,  8. 

moans  of  a  divorce.  The  presumption 
always  was  tliat  a  woman  repudiated 
among  the  Israelites,  was  put  away  from 
her  hubband  lor  some  lault.  It  was  not 
diicorous,  therefore,  for  a  priest  to  blem- 
ibh  his  good  name  by  marrying  a  wo- 
man who  lay  under  a  suspicion  of  some- 
thing  bad. ^  He   is    holy   unto  his 

God.  Set  apart  and  consecrated  in  a 
peculiar  manner  to  the  service  of  God, 
and  therefore  not  allowed  to  bring  dis- 
credit upon  his  office  by  doing  any  thing 
of  dubious  character. 

8.  Thou  shalt  sanctify  him  therefore. 
That  is,  thou,  Israel,  shalt,  one  and  all, 
hold  and  repute  him  as  holy,  and  shalt 
do  all  in  thy  power  to  keep  up  the  sa- 
cred estimation  in  which,  for  his  office's 
sake,  he  is  held.  It  is  possible,  how- 
ever, that  the  address  may  be  intended 
to  be  made  to  Moses,  who  was  to  sanc- 
tify the  priest  by  commanding  him  to 
be  sanclitied,  according  to  a  very  fre- 
quent idiom. 

Of  the  Priest's  Daughter  who  profanes 
herself. 

9.  The  daughter  of  any  priest.  Heb. 
"ip'D  llJ-Ji  ish  kohcn,  a  vian  a  priest. 
There  is  great  unanimity  among  the 
Jewish  commentators  in  understanding 
this  of  a  woman  who  was  married,  or 
at  least  espoused.  '  Our  rabbins,'  say 
Aben  Ezra  and  Sol.  Jarchi,  'confess 
with  one  mouth  that  one  not  espoused 
is  not  concerned  in  this  law.'  But  as 
ll.e  letter  of  the  law  contains  no  such 
limitation,  it  is  doubtless  safe  to  take  it 
in  its  widest  import.  She  is  said  by 
such  conduct  to  pollute  her  father's 
name  ;  whereas  if  she  were  married,  the 
wrong  would  be  rather  done  to  her  hus- 
band.  tr  She  profaneth  her  father, 

that  iS;  brings  disgrace  upon  him.    Gr. 


9  IF  ii  And  the  daughter  of  any 
priest,  if  she  profane  herself  by 
playing  the  whore,  she  profaneth 
her  father:  she  shall  be  burnt 
with  fire. 

b  Gen.  38.  24. 


TO  ovo^a  Tov  narpos  avrm  avrrj  /3e/3r]\oi, 
she  profaneth  her  father's  name.  Chal. 
'  She  profaneth  her  father's  holiness.' 
By  Sol.  Jarchi  it  is  thus  explained: 
'  She  proianelh  and  contemnelh  his  hon- 
or, for  that  men  will  say  of  him.  Cursed 
is  he  that  begat  this  woman  ;  Cursed  is 

he  that  brought  her  up.' TT  She  shall 

be  burnt  with  fire.    '  It  seems,  upon  the 
whole,  very  doubtful  whether  this  and 
other  texts  of  the  same  import  in  the 
early  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  ex- 
press the  punishment  of  burning  alive, 
or  of  the  ignominious  burning  of  the 
body  after  execution.     It  is  certain  we 
have  no  instance  of  the  former  punish- 
ment;  but  we  have  of  the  latter,  as  re- 
sulting  from   such   a  law  as  that   ex- 
pressed in  the  text.     Thus  in  Josh  7. 15, 
it  is  declared  that  the  unknown  person 
who  had  taken  of  the  accursed  thing 
should  be  '  burnt  with  fire  ;'  and  when 
the  man  was  discovered,  we  find  that 
this  intention  was  executed  not  by  burn- 
ing him  alive,  but  by  stoning  him  first 
I  and  then  burning  his  remains  (v.  15). 
We  therefore  lean  to  the  opinion,  that 
I  stoning,  being   the  common   and  well- 
known    punishment,   is   understood   in 
these  texts,  and  that  only  the  additional 
'  punishment  of  burning  the  body  is  ex- 
I  pressed.     Michaelis   thinks  that  burn- 
I  ing    alive   was  not   sanctioned   by  the 
I  Mosaic  law  ;  but  Home,  who  generally 
[  follows  him,  seems   to    consid^-r    that 
both   burning  alive    and   burning   after 
death  are  among  the  punishments  men- 
tioned by  Moses ;  and  it  is  rather  odd 
j  that  he  cites  the  same  texts  in  proof  of 
j  both — namely,  the  one  before  us  and 
'<  that  in  the  next  chapter.     The  testimo- 
:  ny  of  the  Rabbins  is  worth  very  little 
in  this  matter,  as  many  capital  punish- 
ments  were  in  later  times  introduced,  of 


224 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490 


10  iAnd  he  that  is  the  high  priest 
among  his  brethren,  upon  whose 
head  the  anointing  oil  was  poured, 
and  k  that  is  consecrated  to  put  on 
the  garments,  1  shall  not  uncover 
his  head,  nor  rend  his  clothes; 

i  Exod.  29.  29,  30.  ch.  S.  1-2,  and  16.  32. 
Numb.  35.  25.  k  Exod.  28.  2.  ch.  16.  32. 
1  ch.  10.6. 

which  the  law  of  Moses  takes  no  notice. 
They  say,  that  because  the  bodies  of 
Nadab  and  Abihu  were  not  consumed 
by  the  fire  which  slew  them,  it  was 
thought  unlawful  to  burn  a  criminal 
alive  ;  but  that  he  was  put  to  death  by 
melted  lead  being  poured  down  his 
throat.  We  may  accept  this  so  far  as 
to  show  that  persons  were  not  consumed 
alive  in  the  fire  ;  but  we  are  bound  to 
reject  the  other  part,  as  wholly  unsanc- 
tioned by  the  law  of  Moses.  It  is  pos- 
sible that  they  may  had  this  punish- 
ment in  after  times,  when  the  meaning 
of  the  law  had  been  greatly  perverted 
by  absurd  glosses  and  inferences.' — 
Fict.  Bib. 

Rules  regulating  the  Conduct  of  the 
High  Priest. 
10.  He  that  is  the  high  priest  among 
his  brethren.  Heb.  ^n^H  Y>^n 
l^riH^S  hakkohen  haggadol  ml'e^hauv, 
the  priest  (that  is)  great  among  his 
brethren,  or,  greater  than  his  breth- 
ren. Gr.  h  kpevs  0  jJicyag^  the  great 
priest ;  from  which  the  apostle,  Heb. 
4.  14,  applies  the  same  title  to  Christ, 
of  whom  the  Jewish  high  priest  was  a 
distinguished  type.  Sustaining,  there- 
fore, this  high  character,  the  Hebrew 
pontiff  was  to  be  more  especially  stu- 
dious of  his  sanctity,  both  in  avoiding 
defilement  by  the  dead,  and  in  his  mar- 
riage.  This,  by  the  way,  is  the  first 
time  the  title  occurs  in  this  form  in  the 

Scriptures. IT  That  is  consecrated  to 

put  on  the  garments.  That  is,  the 
golden  garments,  as  they  were  called, 
which  were  peculiar  to  the  high  priest, 
and  of  which  a  full   account  is  jriven, 


11  Neither  shall  he  mgo  ia  to  any 
dead  body,  nor  defile  himself  for 
his  father  or  his  mother ; 

12  11  Neither  shall  he  go  out  of 
the  sanctuary,  nor  profane  the 
sanctuary   of  his  God;   for  othe 

m  Numb.  19.  14.  See  ver.  1,2.  n  ch.  10 
7.     o  Exod.  23.  36.     ch.  8.  9,  12,  30. 


Ex.  28.  The  Heb.  phrase  for  '  conse- 
crated '  is  'whose  hand  is  filled,'  i.  e 
with  sacrifices  for  offering,  as  the  Chal 
explains  it,  which  the  Gr.  expresses  by 
the  word  T£>£tow,  to  perfect.  See  the 
true  import  illustrated  in  the  note  on 

Ex.  29.  9. IT  Shall  not  uncover  his 

head.  Heb.  ^^^^  V^  Tl^H'n  rosho  al 
yiphrd,  shall  not  make  free  his  head; 
i.  e.  shall  not  sufier  his  hair  to  go  dis- 
hevelled and  neglected,  without  trim- 
ming, in  token  of  mourning.  See  the 
true  force  of  the  original  term  elucidat- 
ed, Judg.  5.  2.  Chal. '  Let  not  his  locks 
grow.'  Gr.  ovk  a-oKtSapcocei,  let  him  not 
put  off  his  mitre.  See  Note  on  Lev. 
10.6. 

11.  Neither  shall  he  go  in  to  any  dead 
body.  Heb.  fi^  riC£3  ^3  '^5  al  kol 
naphshoth  mi'th,  to  aiiy  souls  of  the 
dead.  Gr.  ctti  naari  ipv^r)  TSreXevTriKvia, 
to  any  soul  that  has  died.  Another  in- 
stance, in  which  the  usual  Heb.  and  Gr. 
terms  for  '  soul  '  are  used  to  signify 
•'  body.'  See  Note  on  Lev.  21.  1.  The 
interdict  here  was  very  rigorous.  He 
WAS  not  permitted  to  go  into  the  house 
where  his  father  or  mother  lay  dead, 
though  this  was  allowed  to  the  inferior 
priests. 

12.  Neither  shall  he  go  out  of  the 
sanctuary,  &c.  That  is,  during  the 
time  that  he  was  officially  engaged  in 
the  services  of  the  sanctuary.  It  mat- 
tered not  who  of  his  family  died  j  he  was 
not  to  leave  his  post  till  his  ministra- 
tions were  finished.  It  is  intimated 
that  by  so  doing  he  would  ^profane  the 
sanctuary  of  his  God,'  i.  e.  would  con- 
structively profane  it  by  showing  that 
he  thought  more  of  earthly  relation- 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXI. 


225 


crown  of  the  anointing  oil  of  his 
God  is  upon  him:  I  a/n  the  Lord. 

13  And  V  he  shall  take  a  wife  in 
her  virginity. 

14  A  widow,  or  a  divorced  wo- 
man, or  profane,  or  an  harlot,  these 
shall  he  not  take:  but  he  shall 
take  a  virgin  of  his  own  people  to 
wife. 

15  ISeither  shall  he  profltue  his 

P  ver.  7.     Exek,  44.  22. 


seed  among  his  people :  for  ql  the 
Lord  do  sanctify  him. 

16  ^  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

17  Speak  unto  Aaron,  saying, 
Whosoever  he  be  of  thy  seed  in 
their  generations  that  hath  «ny 
blemish,  let  him  not  r  approach  to 
offer  the  bread  of  his  God : 

q  ver.  8.  r  ch.  10.  3.  Numb.  16.  5,  Ps. 
64.  4.     ch.  3.  11. 


ships  than  of  his  sacred  functions  ;  that 
he  postponed  his  duty  as  a  priest  to 
his  promptings  as  a  man.     The  Gr.  has 

IK  TU)i>  ayii^iv,  from  the  holy  things. 

IT  For  the  crown  of  the  anointing  oil  of 
his  God  is  upon  him.  Heb.  "^J^TD  *nT] 
nn'U?2  nczer  shemen  mish^ hath,  which 
may  be  understood  in  two  ways  ;  either 
of  the  golden  plate  which  is  called  ^T3 
nezer,  a  crown,  Ex.  29.  6,  and  the 
anointing  oil  ;  or  the  latter  may  be 
simply  exegeiical  of  the  former,  and 
oil  may  be  called  nezer,  a  crown  or 
separation,  because  it  was  by  it  that  he 
was  separated  from  other  men  and  other 
priests.  So  the  Gr.  evidently  under- 
stands it,  which  has  nothing  answering 
to  <  crown'  separate  from  the  'oil,' 
ayiov  iXaiov  to  ^okttov  tov  Osov  the  holy 
oil,  the  chrism  (or  anointing)  of  his 
God.  Adam  Clarke  very  well  remarks 
upon  this,  *  By  his  office  the  (high) 
priest  represented  Christ  in  his  sacri- 
ficial character  ;  by  liis  anointing,  the 
prophetic  influence  ;  and  by  the  crown 
the  regal  dignity  of  our  Lord.' 

13.  He  shall  take  a  wife  in  her  vir- 
ginity. Heb.  (T^piriD  bibthulehd  in 
her  virginity,  a  term  derived  from  ^DDn 
bSthal,  to  separate,  set  apart,  seclude  ; 
and  applied  to  a  virgin  from  her  being 
separated  and  secluded  from  intercourse 
with  ineu,  which  is  emineiuly  the  case 
in  the  East.  Compare  this  and  the  fol- 
lowing verse  with  verse  7,  v;here  the 
prohibited  marriages  of  common  priests 
are  mentioned.  The  difference  is,  that 
widows  are  mentioned  among  those 
whom  the  high  priest  might  not  marry, 


but  not  among  those  with  whom  the 
common  priest  is  forbidden  to  contract 
alliance.  It  would  therefore  seem  that 
the  common  priest  was  allowed  to  mar- 
ry a  widow,  as  Josephus  declares.  Gro- 
tius  and  others,  however,  think  that  a 
priest  could  not  marry  any  widow,  but 
one  whose  deceased  husband  had  also 
been  a  priest.  This  is  inferred  from 
Ezek.  44.  22.  The  high  priest,  being 
precluded  from  marrying  a  widow,  was 
of  course  exempt  from  marrying  the 
widow  of  a  brother  who  died  without 
children.  The  Mohammedans  have  no 
regulations  on  this  subject,  being,  in 
fact,  without  any  distinct  priestly  order. 
But  in  India  it  is  not  lawful  for  the 
priests  to  marry  any  but  virgins.  As 
the  high  priest  was  a  type  of  Christ, 
his  wife,  who  was  to  be  a  virgin,  was 
a  type  of  the  church ;  wlierefore  the 
apostle  says,  2  Cor.  11.2,  'I  have  es- 
poused you  to  one  husband,  that  I  may 
present  you  a  chaste  virgin  to  Christ.' 

15.  Neither  shall  he  profane  his  seed 
among  the  people.  That  is,  he  shall 
not  render  his  sons  unfit  for  the  priest- 
hood by  marrying  contrary  to  the  rules 

above   laid  down,  vv.  13,  14. ^  For 

I  the  Lord  do  sanctify  him.  That  is, 
have  separated  him  to  my  service. 

Rules  in  regard  to  personal  Blemishes. 
17.  Whosoever  he  be  of  thy  seed  in 
their  generations.  That  is,  of  thy  sons 
in  any  generation  of  thy  posterity.  The 
address  is  made  to  Aaron,  and  by  the 
sons  of  Aaron  is  always  to  be  under- 
stood his  successors  in  the  priestly  of? 


226 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


18  For  "whatsoever  man  ^eJe  that  [ 
hath  a  blemish,  he  shall  not  ap- 
proach :  a  blind  man,  or  a  lame,  or  j 
he  that  hath  a  flat  nose,  or  any  \ 
thing  s  superfluous. 

19  Or  a  man  that  is  broken-footed, 
or  broken-handed. 

20  Or  crook-backed,  or  a  dwarf, 
or  that  hath  a  blemish  in  his  eye, 
or  be  scurvy,  or  scabbed,  or  thath 
his  stones  broken ; 

21  No  man  that  hath  a  blemish 
of  the  seed  of  Aaron  the  priest  shall 
come  nigh  to  coffer  the  offerings  of 
the  Lord  made  by  fire  ;  he  hath  a 
blemish,  he  shall  not  come  nigh  to 
offer  the  bread  of  his  God. 

22  He  shall  eat  the  bread  of  his 

s  ch.  22.  23.     t  Deut.  23.  1.     u  ver.  6. 

fice.  The  directions  therefore  concern- 
ed the  priests.  It  is  made  a  standing 
law  that  no  man  whose  person  was  any 
way  disfigured  by  a  blemish  should 
minister  at  the  altar.  No  individual  of 
Aaron's  line  who  was  marked  by  pro- 
minent blemishes,  defects,  or  superflu- 
ities ;  by  unseemly  or  ill-favored  fea- 
tures ;  by  deformity  in  any  part  of  his 
body,  whether  natural  or  accidental ; 
or  had  any  permanent  distemper  upon 
him,  as  scurvy  itch,  scurf,  scab,  &c., 
was  admitted  to  the  exercise  of  the 
priestly  prerogative.  This  requirement 
is  undoubtedly  founded  upon  a  just 
view  of  human  nature,  as  men  are  prone 
to  judge  by  the  outward  appearance, 
and  to  think  meanly  of  any  service, 
however  honorable,  which  is  performed 
by  agents  distinguished  by  personal  de- 
fects. It  was  greatly  for  the  credit  of 
the  sanctuary,  therefore,  that  none 
should  appear  there,  who  were  any  way 
disfigured  by  nature  or  by  accident,  as 
it  would  be  regarded  as  an  indignity  to 
the  Deity  to  consecrate  a  blemished  or 
imperfect  man  to  his  service.  But 
whatever  considerations  of  a  subordi- 
nate nature  may  be  urged  for  this  stat- 
tite,  the  grand  reason  is  undoubtedly  to 
be  found  in  the  fact,  that  the  priests, 


God,  both  of  the  ^  most  holy,  and 
of  the  yholy. 

23  Only  he  shall  not  go  in  unto 
the  vail,  nor  come  nigh  unto  the 
altar,  because  he  hath  a  blemish; 
that  z  he  profane  not  my  sanctu- 
aries :  for  I  the  Lord  do  sanctify 
them. 

24  And  Moses  told  it  unto  Aaron, 
and  to  his  sons,  and  unto  all  the 
children  of  Israel. 

CHAPTER  XXn. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2  Speak  unto  Aaron  and  to  his 

X  ch.  2.  3,  10,  and  C.  17,  29,  and  7.  1,  and 
24.  9.  Numb.  18.  9.  y  ch.  22.  10,  11,  12. 
Numb.  13.  19.     z  ver.  12. 

both  in  their  persons  and  their  work, 
were  types  of  Him  who  was  the  *  Lamb 
without  blemish  and  without  spot,' 
holy,  harmless,  undefiled,  and  separate 
fi  om  sinners.  As  the  particular  defects 
mentioned  are  sufficiently  plain  to  pre- 
clude the  necessity  of  comment,  we 
barely  remark,  that  although  these  de- 
fects disqualified  the  priests  for  the  sa- 
cred functions,  they  did  not  exclude 
them  from  their  prescribed  mainte- 
nance, as  is  evident  from  v.  22,  '  He 
shall  eat  the  bread  of  his  God,  both  of 
the  most  holy  and  the  holy.' 


CHAPTER  XXII. 
Further  Directions  respecting  the  Miw 
ist  rat  ions  of  the  Priests. 
The  same  general  subject  is  contin- 
ued in  the  present  chapter  as  in  the  pre- 
ceding, viz.  the  specification  of  the  va- 
rious causes  which  were  to  operate  as 
impediments  in  the  way  of  the  priests' 
discharging  their  appropriate  functions. 
Of  these  the  prmcipal  were  the  ceremo- 
nial uncleanness  to  which  they  might 
be  subject.  In  the  subsequent  part  of 
the  chapter  the  scope  of  the  lawgiver  is 
to  teach,  that  the  sacrifices,  as  well  as 
the  offerers  must  be  free  from  blemish, 
in  order  to  be  acceptable. 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXII. 


227 


sons,  that  they  a  separate  them- 
selves from  the  holy  things  of  the 
children  of  Israel,  and  that  ihey 
b  profane  not  my  holy  name  in  those 
things  which  they  c  hallow  unto 
me :  I  a7n  the  Lord. 

',i  Say  unto  them.  Whosoever  he 
be  of  all  your  seed  among  your 
generations,  that  goeth  unto  the 
holy  things,  which  the  children  of 
Israel  hallow  unto  the  Lord,  ti  hav- 
ing his  uncleanness  upon  him,  that 
soul  shall  be  cut  off  from  my  pres- 
ence: I  am  the  Lord. 

4  What  man  soever  of  the  seed 
of  Aaron  is  a  leper,  or  hath  ea  run- 
ning issue;  he  shall  not  eat  of  the 
holy    things,  funtil   he  be   clean. 

a  Numb.  6.  3,  b  ch,  18.  21.  c  Exod.  28. 
38.  Numb.  18.  32.  Deut.  15.  19.  d  ch.  7. 
20.     e  cli.  15.  2. 


2.  Speak  unto  Aaron  and  to  his  sons, 
that  they  separate  themselves  from  the 
holy  thiiigs,  &c.  Heb.  nTj"^  yinnazerti, 
that  they  be  separated.  The  root  of  the 
verb  is  IT]  nazar,  to  separate,  from 
which  comes  '  Nazarite,'  one  religious- 
ly separated  from  all  secular  relations. 

Gr.  ffpoo-£;^£ra)aaj/  am  tojv  ayio)v,  let  them 

take  heed  of  the  holy  things.  The  pre- 
cept has  respect  to  such  of  the  priests 
as  were  ceremonially  unclean.  During 
the  time  that  this  uncleanness  was  upon 
them  they  were  to  abstain  from  eating 
the  holy  things  which  ordinarily  belong- 
ed to  the  priests. 11  That  they  profane 

not  my  holy  name.  Heb.  "^IDIp  CiU  shem 
kodshi,  the  name  of  my  holiness.  But 
the  equivalent  rendering  of  our  version 
is  confirmed  by  the  Gr.  to  opoj^a  to  ayi- 
ov  fiov,  my  holy  name.  The  sanctuary 
would  of  course  be  profaned  when  its 
holy  things  were  defiled,  which  they 
would  be  when  offered  or  eaten  by  per- 
sons unclean,  contrary  to  the  express 
commandment  of  God.  Compare  vv, 
15,  32. 

3.  Ainong  your  generations.  That 
is,  either  now  or  at  any  time  hereafter. 
!- — IT  That  goeth  unto  the  holy  things. 


And  g  whoso  toucheth  any  thing 
that  is  unclean  by  the  dead,  or  ba 
man  whose  seed  goeth  from  him  ; 

5  Or  i whosoever  toucheth  any 
creeping  thing,  whereby  he  may  be 
made  unclean,  or  ka  man  of  whom 
he  may  take  uncleanness,  whatso- 
ever uncleanness  he  hath  : 

6  The  soul  which  hath  touched 
any  such  shall  be  unclean  until 
even,  and  shall  not  eat  of  the  holy 
things,  unless  he  i  wash  his  flesh 
with  water. 

7  And  when  the  sun  is  down,  he 
shall  be  clean,  and  shall  afterward 
eat  of  the  holy  things,  because  m  it 
is  his  food. 

f  ch.  14.  2,  and  15.  1.3.  e  Numb.  19.  11,  22. 
h  ch.  15.  16.  i  ch.  11.  24,  43,  44.  i^  ch.  15. 
7,  19.  1  ch.  15.  5.  Heb.  10.  22.  ««  ch.  21. 
22.     Numb.  18.  11,  13. 


That  is,  for  the  purpose  of  eating,  as  is 

to    be   inferred  from  vv.  4,  6,   12. 

IT  Shall  be  cut  off  from  my  presence. 
Heb.  "^llfi^S  mippen'e,  from  my  face  or 
presence  ;  with  a  latent  allusion  to  the 
visible  signal  of  the  divine  presence  in 
the  Shekinah  of  the  tabernacle.  The 
offender  would  be  cut  off  before  that,  as 
were  Nadab  and  Abihu. 

4.  Unclean  by  the  dead.  Heb.  5^)2tD 
lUSD  teme  nephesh,  unclean  (by)  a  soul. 
Gr.  V^yx';,  soul.  For  parallel  usage  see 
on  Lev.  19.  28,  and  21.  1,  and  of  the  na- 
ture of  the  uncleanness  see  Numb. 
19.  11,  14,22.  The  uncleannesses  ad- 
verted  to  m  the  next  chapter  are  such 
as  were  contracted  by  leprosy,  running 
of  the  reins,  involuntary  seed-llux ; 
touching  the  carcase  of  any  forbidden 
creature  ;  eating  of  any  animal  that 
died  of  itself,  or  was  torn  to  pieces  by 
a  ravenous  beast  or  bird  ;  or  by  coming 
in  contact  with  any  person  who  was  at 
the  time  legally  unclean  ;  with  similar 
instances,  which  have  been  considered 
in  the  previous  chapters. 

6-9.  Shall  be  unclean  until  even,  &c. 
The  priest  thus  rendered  unclean  was 
to   remain  like  other  Israelites,  in  a 


228 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


8  ^  That  which  dieth  of  itself,  or 
is  torn  ivith  beasts,  he  shall  not  eat 
to  defile  himself  therewith  :  I  am 
the  Lord. 

9  They  shall  therefore  keep  mine 
ordinance,  ^  lest  they  bear  sin  for 
it,  and  die  therefore,  if  they  profane 
it :  1  the  Loud  do  sanctify  them. 

10  p  There  shall  no  stranger  eat 
of  the  holy  thing:  a  sojourner  of 
the  priest,  or  an  hired  servant, 
shall  not  eat  of  the  holy  thing. 

D  Exod.  22.  31,  ch.  17.  15.  Ezek.  44.  31. 
o  Exod.  23.  43.  Numb.  18.  22.  32.  P  See  1 
Sam.  21.  6. 

state  of  separation  for  a  day,  i.  e,  till 
sunset,  and  be  incapable  of  all  priestly 
offices  and  privileges  till  he  had  washed 
his  clothes  and  his  body,  and  this  under 
the  penalty  of  '  bearing  sin,'  or  suffer- 
ing condign  punishment  by  being  cut 
off  by  the  immediate  hand  of  God,  as 
a  bold  profaner  of  his  service. 

Strangers,  Sojourners,  and  Hired  Ser- 
vants interdicted  from  eating  the 
Holy  Things. 

10.  There  shall  no  stranger  eat  of 
the  holy  thing.  That  is,  not  one  of 
another  nation,  a  foreigner,  but  one  that 
is  not  of  the  seed  of  Aaron,  of  the  family 
of  some  priest,  is  not  to  be  maintained 
by  him  out  of  his  share  of  the  sacrifices. 

IT  Sojourner.     Heb.  iffiin  tosh'tb, 

from  I'J'i  ydshab,  to  dwell.  Gr.  -apoiKos, 
a  stranger-resident.  By  a  '  sojourner 
of  the  priest'  is  to  be  understood  one 
that  should  be  a  boarder  or  lodger  with 
him,  a  transient  inmate  of  his  house. 
Such  an  one  was  not  to  eat  of  the  con- 
secrated things,  but  was  to  live  upon 
what  accrued  to  the  priest  from  his 
common  tithes.  So  also  with  the  hired 
servant. 

11.  If  the  priest  buy  any  soul  with 
his  money.  Heb.  '^'l5p  :L'£3  TOp'i  "^IJ 
ISDiD  ki  yikneh  nephesh  kinyan  kispho, 
when  he  shall  buy  a  soul  the  purchase 
of  his  money.  It  is  evident  from  this 
that  there  were  among  the  ancient  He- 
brews persons  who  were  bought  with 


11  But  if  the  priest  buy  any  soul 
with  his  money,  he  shall  eat  of  it, 
and  he  that  is  born  in  his  house  : 
qthey  shall  eat  of  his  meat. 

12  If  the  priest's  daughter  also  be 
married  unto  a  stranger,  she  may 
not  eat  of  an  offering  of  the  holy 
things. 

13  But  if  the  priest's  daughter  be 
a  widow,  or  divorced,  and  have  no 
child,  and  is  Teturned  unto  her 
father's  house,  s  as  in  her  youth,  she 

q  Numb.  18.  11,13.  r  Gen.  38.  11.  s  ch. 
10.  14.     Numb.  18.  11,  19. 


money.  At  the  same  lime  it  by  no 
means  follows,  that  the  slavery  which 
existed  among  them  was  of  a  nature 
similar  to  that  which  is  unhappily  es- 
tablished among  us,  or  which  can  be 
justly  pleaded  as  a  precedent  to  war- 
rant it.  Those  who  were  thus  *  pur- 
chased,' and  held  in  this  servile  rela- 
tion, were  generally  those  of  their  own 
nation,  who  from  being  reduced  to  a 
stale  of  poverty,  had  sold  their  own 
services,  or  those  whose  services  had 
become  forfeited  by  a  breach  of  the 
laws,  or  lastly,  those  who  were  obtained 
from  the  surrounding  heathen  in  the 
manner  which  will  be  considered  in  the 
Notes  on  Lev.  25.  It  is  certain,  hov/- 
ever,  that  from  whatever  source  they 
were  obtained,  they  v/ere  treated  like 
the  rest  of  the  family  to  which  they 
belonged,  and  had  privileges  entirely 
unknown    to    modern   servitude.      See 

Note  on   Gen.   15.  3. IT  He  that  is 

born  in  his  house.  The  children  of  his 
slave. 

12,  13.  If  a  priesVs  daughter  be  mar' 
ried  to  a  stranger.  That  is,  to  one 
who  was  not  of  the  stock  or  family  of 
the  priests,  in  relation  to  whom  oihei 
Israelites  were  counted  as  '  strangers.' 
By  marrying  out  of  the  priestly  linf 
she  of  course  lost  the  right  which  sht 
had  to  her  share  of  the  Levitical  main- 
tenance while  she  remained  at  home  in 
her  father's  house.  An  exception  tc 
this  rule  is  stated  in  the  next  verse, 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXII. 


229 


shall  eat  of  her  father's  meat ;  but 
there  shall  no  stranger  eat  thereof. 

14  ^tAnd  if  a  man  eat  of  the 
holy  thing  unwittingly,  then  he 
shall  put  the  fifth  part  thereof  unto 
.t,  and  shall  give  it  unto  the  priest, 
wiih  the  holy  thing. 

15  And  u  they  shall  not  profane 
I  lie  holy  things  of  the  children  of 
Israel  which  they  offer  unto  the 
LoiiD : 

16  Or  suffer  them  ^  to  bear  the 
iniquity  of  trespass,  when  they  eat 

«  ch.  5.  15,  16.     u  Numb.  IS.  32.      x  ver.  9. 

when  a  priest's  daughter  so  married 
was  left  a  widow,  or  had  been  divorced, 
without  children.  In  this  case,  she  was 
permitted  to  return  and  become  a  mem- 
ber of  her  father's  family  as  before,  and 
ate  of  his  food,  like  the  rest  of  his 
family. 

The  case  of  one  who   ate  of  the  Holy 
Things  unwittingly. 

14.  If  a  man  eat  of  the  holy  thing 
unwittingly.  Heb.  n33'i;3  bishgagdh, 
throu'gh  unadvised  error.  Though  the 
act  were  done  ignorantly  and  uninten- 
tionally, yet  in  order  to  inspire  the  ut- 
most caution  in  respect  to  holy  things, 
the  priest  was  to  afijjc  a  value  to  the 
thing  eaten,  which  the  offender  was 
obliged  to  pay,  together  with  a  fifth 
part  of  the  value  in  addition  ;  all  which 
went  to  the  priest. 

15,  16.  They  shall  not  profane,  &c. 
That  is,  the  priests  should  not  profane 
the  holy  things  by  suffering  them  to  be 
eaten  by  strangers.  The  phrase  in  the 
next  verse,  *  suffer  them  to  bear  the  ini- 
quity,'  may  be  rendered  '  cause  them  to 
bear,'  meaning  that  they  shall  not  by 
their  negligence  cause  the  people  to  fall 
under  the  punishment  which  God  would 
inflict  for  such  a  trespass.  Otherwise 
it  may  be  understood  of  the  priests 
themselves,  which  appears  to  be  inti- 
mated by  the  marginal  reading,  '  lade 
themselves  with  the  iniquity  of  trespass 
m  their  eating.'     This  is  favored  by  the 

20 


their  holy  things:  fori  the  Lord 
do  sanctify  them. 

17  H  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

18  Speak  unto  Aaron,  and  to  his 
sons,  and  unto  all  the  children  of 
Israel,  and  say  unto  them,  y  What- 
soever he  be  of  the  house  of  Israel, 
or  of  the  strangers  in  Israel,  that 
will  offer  his  oblation  for  all  his 
vows,  and  for  all  his  free-will-offer- 
ings, which  they  will  offer  unto 
the  Lord  for  a  burnt-ofiering  : 

y  ch.  1.  2,  3,  10.     Numb.  15.  14. 


Gr.  which  has  eTra^ovai  e(j)'  eavTovs  avoynav, 
bring  upon  them  iniquity.  But  after 
all  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  determine 
whether  the  priests  or  the  people  are 
intended. 

Free-will  and  Thank-offerings  for 
Vows  to  be  without  Blemish. 
18.  Speak  unto  Aaron,  and  to  his 
sons,  and  unto  all  the  children  of  Israel. 
As  the  enactments  that  follow  had  re- 
spect to  the  quality  of  the  sacrifices 
which  were  to  be  offered  by  the  congre- 
gallon,  the  congregation  had,  of  course, 
as  much  concern  in  them  as  the  priests, 
and  therefore  they  are  addressed  to  the 
whole  people  collectively.  They  con- 
stitute a  strict  injunction  that  all  sacri- 
fices by  way  of  present,  or  free-will 
offering  to  God,  made  either  by  Israelite 
or  proselyte,  for  thanksgiving  for  former 
mercies,  or  by  way  of  vow  for  procur- 
ing blessings  desired,  should  be  perfect 
in  their  kind.  No  beast  that  was  mark- 
ed by  any  apparent  defect,  superfluity, 
excrescence,  deformity,  or  disease,  was 
permitted  to  come  upon  the  altar.  For 
the  reason  of  this  statute,  see  Note  on 

Lev.  1.,  prefatory  remarks. IT  Or  of 

the  strangers  in  Israel.  Heb.  ^^H  ^2 
min  haggir,  from  the  stranger,  collect, 
sing.  Gr.  tuw  T:po(rr]\vTiJv  tmv  KOoaKCi- 
fiEvoiv  TTpog  avTovi  cv  lo-joarjX,  of  the  pros- 
elytes joined  unto  them  in  Israel  ;  i.  e. 
such  of  the  surrounding  heathen  na- 
lions  as  had  renounced  idolatry  and  be- 


S30 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


19  *  Ye  shall  offer  at  your  own 
will  a  male  without  blemish  of  the 
beeves,  of  the  sheep,  or  of  the  goats. 

20  ^Biii  whatsoever  hath  a  blem- 
ish, that  shall  ye  not  offer:  for  it 
shall  not  be  acceptable  for  you. 

21  And  b  whosoever  off'ereth  a 
sacrifice  of  peace-offerings  unto  the 
Lord  c  to  accomplish  his  vow,  or  a 
free-will-offering  in  beeves,  or 
sheep,  it  shall  be  perfect  to  be  ac- 
cepted: there  shall  be  no  blemish 
therein. 

22  d  Blind,  or  broken,  or  maimed, 
or  having  a  wen,  or  scurvy,  or  scab- 

z  ch.  1.  3.  a  Deut.  16.  il,  and  17.  1.  Mai. 
1.  8,  14.  Eph.  5.  27.  Heb.  9,  14.  1  Pet.  1. 
19.  b  ch.  3.  1,  6.  c  ch.  7.  16.  Numb.  15. 
3,  8.  Deut.  i3.  21,  23.  Ps.  61.  8,  and  65. 
1.     EccJes.  5.  4,  5.     d  ver.  20.     Mai.  1.  8. 


come  converts  to  the  faith  of  Israel,  but 
had  not  been  circumcised.  These  were 
usually  called  proselytes  of  the  gate, 
and  diflered  entirely  from  the  strangers 
alluded  to,  v.  25,  as  will  be  seen  by  the 
Note  in  loc. 

19.  At  your  own  will.  Rather,  ac- 
cording to  the  Heb.  '  for  your  favorable 
acceptance.'  See  Note  on  Lev.  1.  3. 
Gr.  6cKra,  acceptable.  Thus  too,  Sol. 
Jarchi,  '  Bring  the  thing  that  is  meet  to 
make  you  acceptable  before  me,  that  it 
may  be  to  your  favorable  acceptation.' 
So  in  the  next  verse,  the  leading  word 
in  the  clause,  '  it  shall  not  be  acceptable 
for  you.'  is  in  the  original  precisely  the 
same  ("^IIS"!  rdtzon). 

23.  That  hath  any  thing  superfluous 
or  lacking.  That  is,  deformed  by  any 
peculiar  elongation  or  contraction  of  its 

limbs. ir  That  mayest  thou  off er  for 

a  free-will  offering.  The  most  obvi- 
ous construction  of  iliis  passage  is,  that 
the  two  kinds  of  defect  just  mentioned, 
though  they  prevented  the  acceptance 
of  an  animal  for  a  vow,  did  not  for 
a  free-will  offering;  which  would  seem 
to  have  been  con.^idered  of  less  value. 
But  the  Hebrew  writers  understand  by 
free-will  offering,  in  this  case,  not  an 
offering  for  sacrifice  on  the  altar,  where 


bed,  ye  shall  not  offer  these  unto 
the  Lord,  nor  make  ean  offering 
by  fire  of  them  upon  the  altar  unto 
the  Lord. 

23  Either  a  bullock,  or  a  lamb 
that  hath  any  thing  ^superfluous 
or  lacking  in  his  parts,  that  mayest 
thou  offer  for  a  free-will-offering  ; 
but  for  a  vow  it  shall  not  be  ac- 
cepted. 

24  Ye  shall  not  offer  unto  the 
Lord  that  which  is  bruised,  or 
crushed,  or  broken,  or  cut ;  neither 
shall  ye  make  any  offering  thereof 
in  your  land. 

25  Neither  gfrom  a  stranger's 
hand  shall  ye  oflfer  ^  the  bread  of 

e  ch.  1.  9,  13,  and  3.  3,  5.  f  ch.  21.  18. 
§  Numb.  15. 15,  16,     hch.  21.6,  17. 

a  blemished  beast  under  no  circum- 
stances was  allowed,  but  for  the  main- 
tenance of  the  priests,  or  for  sacred 
uses  in  general }  as,  for  instance,  to  be 
sold  for  the  reparation  of  the  temple, 
&c. 

24.  Ye  shall  not  offer  unto  the  Lord 
that  which  is  bruised,  or  crushed,  or 
broken,  or  cut.  That  is,  castrated  ;  of 
which  there  were  four  modes,  expressed 

by  these  four  terms. IT  Neither  shall 

ye  make  any  offering  thereof  in  your 
land.  Heb.  iryri  St^)  C»::ni<n  beartze- 
kem  lo  taasu,  in  your  land  ye  shall  7iot 
make  or  do  {it).  That  is,  as  the  He- 
brews  understand  it,  ye  shall  not  do  this 
thing,  ye  shall  not  be  in  the  piaclice  of 
castrating  your  animals  in  any  part  of 
your  land.  Otherwise  it  may  be  under- 
stood as  in  our  version,  which  is  sustain- 
ed by  the  Greek.  See  Note  on  Deut.  23. 1. 

25.  Neither  from  a  stranger^s  hand 
shall  ye  offer.  Heb.  ^^3  "p  Ti?a 
miyad  b'in  nakdr,  from  the  hand  of  the 
son  of  an  alien.  That  is,  a  Gentile,  a 
foreigner,  one  not  of  the  seed  of  Israel. 
Gr.  aWoytvrjs,  of  another  stock.  The 
Hebrew  writers  for  the  most  part  ex- 
pound this  of  blemished  beasts,  brought 
by  Gentiles  to  be  offered  to  the  Lord, 
which  was  sometimes  the  case  with 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXII. 


231 


your  God  of  any  of  these ;  because 
their  i  corruption  zs  in  them,  anc? 
blemishes  be  in  them :  they  shall 
not  be  accepted  for  you. 

26  ^  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

21  k  When  a  bullock,  or  a  sheep, 
or  a  goat  is  brought  forth,  then  it 
shall  be  seven  days  under  the  dam  ; 
and  from  the  eighth  day  and  thence- 
forth it  shall  be  accepted  for  an  of- 
fering made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord. 

28  And  ivhcther  it  be  cow,  or  ewe, 
ye  shall  not  kill  it  land  her  young 
both  in  one  day. 

i  Mai.  1.14.    k  Exod.  22.  30.   1  Deut.  22.  6. 

those  who  were  convinced  of  the  folly 
of  idolatry,  and  felt  the  prompting  of  a 
better  service  towards  God.  This  is 
recognized  by  Maimonides  :  '  If  the 
heathen  (Gentile)  bringeth  peace-offer- 
ings, he  offereth  them  for  burnt-offerings, 
for  the  heathen's  heart  is  towards 
heaven  ;'  they  are  often  prompted  to 
worship.  We  see  something  of  this 
kind  iu  the  case  of  Cyrus,  Ezra  6.  8-10. 
But  though  their  sacrifices  were  allow- 
ed, yet  tlie  victims  were  required  to  be 
no  less  perfect  than  those  of  the  Israel- 
ites. As  ihey  were  to  bring  no  blem- 
ished offering,  so  they  were  to  take 
none  such  from  the  hand  of  a  stranger. 
Such  offerers  were  obliged  to  adhere  to 
the  riles  of  the  country  observed  by  the 
priests.  Thus  Alexander  the  Great, 
when  he  was  at  Jerusalem,  offered  sac- 
rifice to  God  according  to  the  directions 
of  the  high  priest.  Josephus,  Lib.  11., 
at  the  end. IT  Because  their  corrup- 
tion is  in  them.  That  is,  their  faults 
are  in  them,  the  faults  above  mentioned  ; 
which  might  as  a  general  rule  be  pre- 
sumed, coming  from  the  source  lliey 
did.  It  would  be  natural  that  the  ideas 
of  the  heathen  on  these  matters  would 
be  very  loose. 

The  -^ge  at  which   different  Animals 
were  to  be  offered  to  God. 
27.  It  shall  be  seven  days  under  the 


29  And  when  ye  will  m  offer  a 
sacrifice  of  thanksgiving  unto  the 
Lord,  offer  it  at  your  own  will. 

30  On  the  same  day  it  shall  be 
eaten  up,  ye  shall  leave  n  none  of  it 
until  the  morrow:  I  am  the  Lord. 

31  o  Therefore  shall  ye  keep  my 
commandments,  and  do  them  :  I 
am  the  Lord. 

32  p  Neither  shall  ye  profane  my 
holy  name;  butql  will  be  hallowed 
among  the  children  of  Israel :  I 
am  the  Lord  which  r  hallow  you, 

m  ch.  7.  12.  Ps.  107.  22,  and  IIC.  17.  Amos 
4.  5.  n  ch.  7.  15.  o  ch.  19.  37.  Numb.  15.  40. 
Deut.  4.  40.  P  ch.  13.  21.  q  ch.  10.  3. 
Matt.  6.  9.     Luke  11.  2.     r  ch.  20.  8. 

dam.  Before  the  eighth  day  they  were 
not  fit  for  food,  and  therefore  not  for 
sacrifice,  which  was  the  bread  or  food 
of  God,  as  it  is  frequently  termed.  See 
Note  on  Ex.  22.  30. 

28.  Ye  shall  not  kill  it  and  her  young 
both  in  one  day.  This  precept  seems 
to  be  confined  to  sacrifices,  which  were 
to  be  devoid  of  all  appearance  of  cruelty. 
The  Jews  in  general  understand  it  as 
inculcating  mercy.  Maimonides  ex- 
pressly remarks,  that  it  was  designed 
to  prevent  the  slaughter  of  the  young 
'  in  the  presence  of  the  dam,  because 
this  occasions  to  animals  extreme  grief; 
nor  is  there,  in  this  respect,  a  difference 
between  the  distress  of  man  and  that  of 
the  irrational  creation.'  The  Targum 
of  Jonathan  beautifully  introduces  the 
verse  with  this  paraphrase  ; — '  And  my 
people,  the  children  of  Israel,  as  our 
Father  is  merciful  in  heaven,  so  be  ye 
merciful  on  earth.' 


CHAPTER  XXIIL 

THE   JEWISH   FESTIVALS. 

The  present  chapter  partakes  in  great 
measure  of  the  character  of  the  nine- 
teenth, containing  a  republication  of 
certain  laws.  The  inspired  historian 
having  previously  given  full  details  of 
the  statutes  relative  to  holy  persons, 
holy  things,  and  holy  places,  now  enters 


1^32 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


33  •  That  brought  you  out  of  the 

»  Ex.  6.  7.    ch.  11.  45,  and  19.  36,  and  55. 
39.    Numb.  15.  41. 


land  of  Egypt,  to  be  your  God :  I 
am  the  Lord. 


upon  the  consideration  of  holy  times. 
The  laws  relative  to  the  annual  fast, 
the  feast  of  trumpets,  and  the  three 
great  annual  festivals,  are  here  all 
brought  together  in  one  view,  in  their 
chronological  order,  along  with  the  law 
of  tlie  Sabbath;  and  additions  to  the 
ceremonies,  as  before  prescribed,  are 
interspersed.  These  festivals  consti- 
tuted a  very  peculiar  feature  of  the 
Hebrew  polity.  Their  influence,  in- 
volving as  they  did  the  meeting  of  the 
mass  of  the  male  population  in  one 
place  three  times  every  year,  cannot  be 
too  highly  estimated.  The  journey 
itself,  taking  place  at  the  finest  season 
of  the  year,  would  naturally  be  deemed 
rather  a  recreative  excursion  than  a 
hardship,  in  a  country  so  small  as  that 
which  the  Hebrews  were  destined  to 
occupy.  One  grand  design  of  these 
re-unions  appears  to  have  been  to  coun- 
teract the  dividing  tendency  of  the  sepa- 
ration into  clans  or  tribes.  By  being 
thus  brought  into  contact  on  an  equal 
footing,  they  were  reminded  of  their 
common  origin,  and  of  their  common 
objects.  The  fact  was  brought  home 
vividly  to  their  thoughts  that  they  were 
the  sons  of  the  same  father,  worship- 
pers of  the  same  God,  and  heirs  of  the 
same  promises.  The  beginnings  also 
of  idolatry  were  likely  to  be  checked 
by  the  frequent  renewal  of  these  acts 
of  worship  and  homage.  Persons  of 
distant  towns  and  different  tribes  met 
together  on  terms  of  brotherhood  and 
fellowship;  and  old  relations  were  re- 
newed, and  new  ones  formed. 

Several  sections  are  devoted  by  Mi- 
chaelis  to  the  statement  of  the  political 
and  other  advantages  resulting  from 
these  festivals.  Among  other  conside- 
rations, he  observes,  that  if  any  of  the 
tribes  happened  to  be  jealous  of  each 
other,  or,  as  was  sometimes  the  case, 
involved  in  civil  war,  still  their  meet- 


ing together  in  one  place  for  the  purpos- 
es of  religion  and  sociality,  had  a  ten- 
dency to  prevent  their  being  completely 
alienated,  and  forming  themselves  into 
two  or  more  unconnected  states  ;  and 
even  though  this  had  at  any  time  hap- 
pened, it  gave  them  an  opportunity  of 
again  cementing  their  differences,  and 
re-uniting.  This  is  so  correctly  true, 
that  the  separation  of  the  ten  tribes 
from  the  tribe  of  Judah,  under  Reho- 
boam  and  Jeroboam,  could  never  have 
been  permanent,  had  not  the  latter  ab- 
rogated one  part  of  the  Law  of  Moses 
relative  to  festivals. 

Another  effect  of  these  meetings  rb- 
garded  the  internal  commerce  of  the 
Israelites.  From  the  annual  conven- 
tions of  the  whole  people  of  any  country 
for  religious  purposes,  there  generally 
arise,  without  any  direct  intention  on 
their  part,  annual  fairs,  and  internal 
commerce.  Such  festivals  have  always 
been  attended  with  this  effect.  The 
famous  old  fair  near  Hebron  arose  from 
the  congregation  of  pilgrims  to  the  ter- 
ebinth-tree of  Abraham.  The  yearly 
fairs  among  the  Germans  had  a  similar 
origin.  Among  the  Mohammedans 
similar  festivals  have  always  had  the 
same  results.  Witness  the  annual  pil- 
grimage to  Mecca,  which,  in  spite  of 
many  adverse  circumstances,  has  given 
birth  to  one  of  the  greatest  markets  in 
the  world.  Now  the  very  same  eflects 
and  to  a  still  higher  degree,  must,  even 
without  any  intention  on  the  part  of  the 
legislator,  have  resulted  from  the  high 
festivals  of  the  Hebrews,  to  which  the 
whole  people  were  bound  to  assemble  ; 
and  more  particularly  as  far  as  regards 
internal  trade.  Let  us  only  figure  to 
ourselves  what  would  necessarily  fol- 
low from  such  festivals  being  establish- 
ed. Every  man  would  bring  along  with 
him  every  portable  article  which  he 
could  spare,  and  which  he  wished  to  turn 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXni. 


CHAPTER  XXni. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unro  them,  Concern- 
ing a  the  feasts  of  the  Lord,  which 

a  ver.  4.  37. 

into  money  ;  and  as  several  individuals 
would  go  from  the  same  place,  they 
would  contrive  various  expedients  to 
render  their  goods  portable ;  and  this 
would  be  the  more  readily  suggested 
by  the  habit  of  taking  things,  some  of 
them  needing  carriage,  to  Jerusalem,  as 
dues  and  oiferings.  Nor  are  means  of 
conveyance  expensive  in  the  East,  as 
they  consist  not,  as  with  us,  of  wagons 
and  horses,  but  of  asses  and  camels — 
beasts  which  are  highly  serviceable  in 
promoting  the  internal  traffic  of  Syria 
and  Arabia.  There  could  never  be  any 
want  of  buyers,  where  the  whole  people 
were  convened  ;  and  the  wholesale  mer- 
chants would  soon  find  it  for  their  ad- 
vantage to  attend,  and  purchase  the 
commodities  offered  for  sale  by  private 
individuals,  especially  manufactured 
goods.  Whoever  wished  to  purchase 
any  particular  articles  would  await  the 
festivals  in  order  to  have  a  choice  ; 
and  this,  too,  would  lead  great  mer- 
chants to  attend  with  all  manner  of 
goods  for  sale,  for  which  they  could 
hope  to  find  purchasers.  However, 
therefore,  Moses  may  have  desired  to 
discourage  the  Israelites  from  engaging 
in/oreeg^n  commerce, his  measures  were, 
in  this  instance  at  least,  and  whether 
intended  or  not,  highly  favorable  to  the 
internal  intercourse  and  traffic  of  the 
country. 

For  a  more  extended  view  of  the 
happy  effects,  political,  social,  and  eco- 
nomical,  of  these  festivals,  see  Mi- 
chaelis'  Comment,  on  Laws  of  Moses, 
vol.  Ill   §  197-201. 

General  Introduction. 
2.  Concerning  the  feasts  of  the  Lord. 
Heb.  niri""  'il^'I'O  mocd'e  Yehovah,  (as 
20* 


ye  shall  b  proclaim  to  be  holy  con- 
vocations, even  these  are  my  feasts 
3  c  Six  days  shall  work  be  done ; 
but  the  seventh  day  is  the  sabbath 
of  rest,  an  holy  convocation :  ye 

b  Exod.  32.  5.  2  Kings  10.  20.  Ps.  81.  3 
c  Exod.  20.  9,  and  23.  12,  and  31.  15,  and  34 
21.     ch.  19.  3.     Deut.  5.  13.     Luke  13.  14. 


to)  the  feasts  of  Jehovah.  The  origina. 
word  ^3?1)3  mo'ed,  from  ^t^^  yuad,  to 
fix  by  appointment,  literally  implies 
merely  a  set  time,  a  stated  season,  for 
any  purpose  whatever,  but  is  applied 
here  and  often  elsewhere  to  the  solemn 
feasts  of  the  Israelites,  which  were  ap- 
pointed  by  God,  and  fixed  to  certain 
seasons  of  the  year.  It  is  sometimes 
rendered  in  the  Gr.  by  eopTrj,  a  feast,  and 
sometimes  by  Travnyvpig,  a  general  as- 
sembly, of  which  the  former  occurs.  Col. 
2.  16,  '  Let  no  man  judge  you  in  meat, 
or  in  drink,  or  in  respect  of  an  holy  day 
{copTT}),  or  of  the  new  moon,  or  of  the 
sabbath-days ;'  and  the  other  Heb.  12. 23, 

'  But  ye  are  come to   the  general 

assembly  (Trav/jyupfs)  and  church  of  the 
first-born.'  Perhaps  a  more  suitable 
rendering  of  the  term  would  be  '  solem- 
nities.'  IT  Which  ye  shall  proclaim 

to  be  holy  convocations.  The  Hebrew 
may  be  rendered  more  literall}^,  '  which 
ye  shall  call  (as)  callings  of  holiness;' 
i.  e.  assemblages  of  the  people  which 
should  be  convened  for  holy  or  sacred 
purposes  at  set  times  by  public  procla- 
mation, and  generally  by  the  sound  of 

a  trumpet.  Num.  10.  8-10. IT  These 

are  my  feasts.  Or,  my  assemblies,  ap- 
pointed in  honor  of  my  name,  and  to  be 
observed  in  obedience  to  my  command  ; 
viz.  the  sabbath,  the  passover,  pente- 
cost,  the  beginning  of  the  new  year,  the 
day  of  atonement,  and  the  feast  of  tab- 
ernacles ;  all  which  are  embraced  under 
the  general  name  nyi?^  mo'cd,  and  none 
besides. 

The  Sabbath. 
3.  Six  days  shall  work  be  done  ;  but 
the  seventh  day  is  a  sabbath  of  rest,  &c. 
Heb.  y\r-2"22  t.T^  shabbath  shabbathon, 


234 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


shall  do  no  work  therein,  it  is  the 
sabbath  of  the  Lord  in  all  your 
dwellings. 

4  ^  d  These  are  the  feasts  of  the 
Lord,'  even  holy  convocations, 
which  ye  shall  proclaim  in  their 
season*!. 

5  e  III  the  fourteenth  day  of  the 
first  month  at  even  is  the  Lord's 
passover. 

rt  ver.  2.  37.  Exod.  23.  14.  e  Exod.  12.  6, 
14,  18,  and  13.  3,  10,  and  23  15,  and  34.  18. 
Numb.  9.  2,  3,  and  28.  16,  17.  Deut.  16.  1-8. 
Josh.  5.  10. 

a  sabbath  of  sabbatism  ;  a  highly  em- 
phatic phrase  denoting  the  greatest  de- 
gree of  consecration  to  purposes  of  rest. 
Although  the  main  scope  of  the  chap- 
ter has  relation  to  other  sacred  seasons, 
yet  as  the  Sabbath  was  ever  to  he  es- 
teemed the  grand  solemnity,  which  was 
never  to  be  supplanted  or  eclipsed  by 
any  other,  therefore  it  is  introduced  here 
by  way  of  preface  to  the  others.  See 
Note  on  Gen.  2.  3. IT  An  holy  convo- 
cation. That  is,  a  time  of  holy  convo- 
cation ;  from  which  it  appears  that 
meetings  for  public  worship  are  an  es- 
sential part  of  the  due  observance  of 
the  day,  and  that  they  cannot  be  ne- 
glected or  omitted  without  going  con- 
trary to  one  main  design  of  the  insti- 
tution.  ^  Ye  shall  do  no  work  there- 
in. On  other  holy  days  they  were 
forbidden  to  do  any  servile  work,  v.  7, 
but  un  the  sabbath,  and  the  day  of  atone- 
ment, (which  is  also  called  a  sabbath,) 
they  were  to  do  no  work  at  all,  not  even 

the  dressing  of  meat. IT  In  all  your 

dwellings.  Heb.  fD^t^lXTZ  ^m  bekol 
meshubothekem,  in  all  your  dvielling- 
plnces  ;  by  which  is  meant  not  so  much 
in  their  private  habitations  as  in  the  va- 
rious places  of  their  residence  over  the 
country.  (ir.  tv  iraari  KaraiKia  v^imv^ 
in  all  your  inhabiting,  i.  e.  in  every 
place  that  you  may  inhabit.  The  great 
feasts  were  to  be  kept  in  one  place 
where  the  sanctuary  was  established  ; 
but  tlio  sabbaths  in  this  respect  differed 
from  them.     They  were  to  be  observed 


6  And  on  the  fifteenth  day  of  the 
same  month  is  the  feast  of  unleav- 
ened bread  unto  the  Lord:  seven 
days  ye  must  eat  unleavened  bread. 

7  fin  the  first  day  ye  shall  have 
an  holy  convocation ;  ye  shall  do 
no  servile  work  therein. 

8  But  ye  shall  offer  an  offering 
made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord  seven 
days;  in  the  seventh  day  is  an  holv 
convocation,  ye  shall  do  no  servile 
work  therein. 

f  Exod.  12.  16.     Numb.  23.  18.  25. 


all  over  the  land  wherever  they  dwelt, 
particularly  in  the  synagogues  in  every 
city.  Acts  15,  21. 

1.  The  Passover. 

5-S.  On  the  fourteenth  day  of  the 
first  month  at  even  is  the  Lord^s  Pass- 
over. Although  moons,  which  began 
with  the  new  moon,  cannot,  with  jier- 
feet  accuracy,  be  accommodated  to  our 
months,  the  first  month  of  tlie  Hebrew 
year  must  always  have  fallen  within 
the  month  of  April. 

The  Passover,  it  is  well  known,  was 
kept  in  remembrance  of  the  exodus 
from  Egypt.  The  etymology  of  the 
term,  and  the  occasion  and  circum- 
stances of  the  institution  have  already 
been  dwelt  upon  in  our  Notes  on  Ex. 
12.  We  shall  consequently  be  spared 
the  necessity  of  any  thing  more  than  a 
general  sketch  of  the  observance  of  this 
feast.  On  the  eve  of  the  14lh  day  of 
the  month  (Abib  or  Nisan)  all  leaven 
was  removed  Irom  their  dwellings,  so 
that  nothing  might  be  seen  of  it  during 
the  week  ;  a  circumstance  respecting 
which  the  Jews  are  very  scrupulous 
even  at  this  day.  Previously  to  the 
commencement  of  the  feast,  on  the  tenth, 
the  master  of  a  family  set  apart  a  ram 
or  a  goat  of  a  year  old,  usually  the  for- 
mer, which  he  slew  on  the  fourteenth, 
'  between  the  two  evenings,'  before  the 
altar  ;  but  in  Egypt,  where  the  event 
occurred  which  tlie  Passover  celebrat- 
ed, the  blood  was  sprinkle^  on  the  post 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 


235 


9  IT  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

10  Speak  unio  the  children  of  Is- 

of  the  door.  The  ram  or  kid  was  roast- 
ed vvliole,  with  two  spits  thrust  through 
it.  the  one  leiigtluvise,  the  other  trans- 
versely, crossing  the  longitudinal  one 
near  the  fore  legs,  so  that  the  animal 
was,  in  a  manner,  crucified.  The  oven 
in  wliich  it  was  roasted  was  the  circular 
pit  in  the  floor  [ground],  which  is  still 
commonly  used  in  the  East.  The  re- 
striction that  it  was  to  be  roasted,  not 
boiled  or  eaten  raw,  is  thought  to  be 
levelled  at  some  idolatrous  forms  of 
sacrifice-feasting.  Thus  roasted,  the 
Paschal  Lamb  was  served  up  with  a 
salad  of  wild  and  bitter  herbs,  and  with 
the  flesh  of  other  sacrifices  (peace- 
ofFerings),  which  are  mentioned  in 
Deut.  16.  2-6.  Not  fewer  than  ten,  nor 
more  than  twenty  persons  were  admit- 
ted to  these  sacred  feasts,  which  were, 
at  first,  eaten  in  Egypt  with  loins  girt 
about,  with  sandals  on  the  feet,  and 
with  all  the  preparations  for  an  imme- 
diate journey.  But  this  does  not  ap- 
pear to  have  been  the  case  at  any  sub- 
sequent period.  The  command,  how- 
ever, not  to  break  a  bone  of  the  offering, 
which  was  given  in  consequence  of  the 
people  going  in  such  haste  (as  they 
might  otherwise  have  been  delayed), 
was  ever  after  observed  among  the  Jews, 
In  later  times  the  celebration  became 
encumbered  with  a  number  of  involved 
ceremonies,  very  different  from  the  sim- 
plicity and  haste  of  the  original  institu- 
tion. As  these  derive  no  authority  from 
the  law,  we  shall  only  state  such  of 
them  as  serve  to  illustrate  the  account 
of  that  celebration  of  the  Passover  by 
Jesus  Christ,  which  to  the  Christian  is 
not  less  interesting  than  the  original  in- 
stitution was  to  the  Jew.  The  master 
of  the  family,  after  the  Paschal  supper 
was  prepared,  broke  the  bread,  having 
first  blessed  it,  and  distributed  it  to  all 
who  were  seated  around  him,  so  that 
each  one  might  receive  a  «part  ;   and 


rael,  and  say  unto  them,  gWhen 

S  Exod.  23.  16.  19,  and  34.  22,  26.  Numb. 
15.  2,  18,  and  28.  26.  Deut.  16.  9.  Josh. 
3.  15. 


each  was  at  liberty  to  dip  it,  before  eat- 
ing, into  a  vessel  of  sauce.  There  were 
four  cups  of  wine  ordinarily  drank  at 
this  supper,  two  before  and  two  after 
meat.  "With  the  second,  the  two  first 
hymns  of  what  was  called  the  lesser 
ifa//e/,  being  Psalms  113.  and  114.,  were 
sung  or  chanted.  The  third  cup,  being 
the  first  after  supper,  was  called  the 
cup  of  blessing,  because  over  it  they 
blessed  God,  or  said  grace  after  meat. 
This  was  followed  by  a  fourth  and  last 
cup,  over  which  they  completed  the 
hymn  of  praise,  formed  by  the  remain- 
der of  the  lesser  Hallel,  and  thus  the 
feast  concluded.  But  it  is  said  that  a 
fifth  cup  of  wine  might  be  drunk  by 
those  who  wished  to  repeat  the  great 
Halle],  which  is  generally  understood 
to  be  Psalm  136.  The  wine  was  red, 
mixed  with  water. 

The  Passover  was  immediately  fol- 
lowed by  the  Feast  of  Unleavened 
Bread,  which  lasted  seven  days,  so  that 
the  two  together  seemed  to  make  one 
feast  of  eight  days,  and  were,  in  fact, 
popularly  so  considered,  the  names  be- 
ing often  interchanged,  so  that  the  Pass- 
over day  was  sometimes  considered  as 
the  first  day  of  the  feast  of  unleavened 
bread,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  whole 
was  often  called  the  Passover  Feast. 
The  first  and  last  days  ol'  these  seven 
were  to  be  kept  as  Sabbaths,  save  that 
only  servile  labor  was  interdicted, 
which  allowed  food  to  be  cooked.  But 
no  suspension  of  labor  was  required  on 
the  intermediate  five  days,  which  were 
distinguished  chiefly  by  the  abstinence 
from  leavened  bread,  and  by  the  unusual 
number  of  offerings  at  the  tabernacle  or 
temple,  and  of  sacrifices  for  sin.  The 
sixteenth  of  Abib,  or  the  second  day  of 
Unleavened  Bread,  was  distinguished 
by  the  oflTering  of  a  barley  sheaf,  as 
an  introduction  to  the  barley-harvest 
which  was  ripe  about  this  time,  accom 


LEVITICUb. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


ye  be  come  into  the  land  which  I 
give  unto  you,  and  shall  reap  the 
harvest  thereof,  then  ye  shall  bring 
a  sheaf  of  h  the  first-fruits  of  your 
harvest  unto  the  priest: 

11  And  he  shall  i  wave  the  sheaf 
before  the  Lord,  to  be  accepted  for 
you :  on  the  morrow  after  the  sab- 
bath the  priest  shall  wave  it. 

12  And  ye  shall  offer  that  day 
when  ye  wave  the  sheaf,  an  he- 
lamb  without  blemish  of  the  first 
year  for  a  burnt-offering  unto  the 
Lord. 

13  kAnd  the  meat-offering  there- 
of shall  be  two  tenth-deals  of  fine 
flour  mingled  with  oil,  an  offering 

t  Rom.  11.16.  1  Cor.  15.  20.  Jam.  1.  IS. 
Rev.  14.  4.     i  Exod.  29.  24.     k  ch.  2.  14-16. 


panied  by  a  particular  sacrifice,  de- 
scribed in  V.  9-14. 

The   Sheaf  of  First  Fruits. 

10.  When  ye  be  come  into  the  land, 
&c.  The  actual  observance  of  this  law 
was  to  be  deferred  till  they  had  arrived 
m  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  had  become 
permanently  fixed  in  their  settlements  ; 
for  during  their  sojourn  in  the  wilder- 
ness they  could  neither  sow  nor  reap. 

fr  Ye   shall  bring  a  sheaf  of  the 

first  fruits.  A  sheaf  of  the  new  corn 
was  brought  to  the  priest  who  was  to 
heave  it  up,  in  token  of  his  presenting 
it  to  the  God  of  heaven,  and  to  wave  it 
to  and  fro  before  the  Lord,  as  the  Lord 
of  the  whole  earth,  and  the  bountiful 
giver  of  all  its  fruits  and  favors.  This 
offering  of  the  isheaf  of  the  first  fruits 
did  as  it  were  sanctify  to  him  all  the 
rest  of  the  harvest.  Besides,  it  served 
as  a  type  of  Christ,  who,  as  risen  from 
the  dead,  is  the  '  first  fruits  of  them  that 
slept.'     1  Cor.  15.  20. 

14.  Ye  shall  eat  neither  bread,  &c. 
This  is  a  precept  which  would  naturally 
commend  itself  to  the  belter  feelings 
of  every  pious  and  reflecting  mind. 
Nothing  could  be  more  appropriate  than 
thus  to  testify  a  grateful  sense  of  the 


made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord  for  a 
sweet  savour:  and  the  drink-offer- 
ing thereof  shall  be  of  w^ine,  the 
fourth  part  of  an  bin. 

14  And  ye  shall  eat  neither  bread, 
nor  parched  corn,  nor  green  ears, 
until  the  self-same  day  that  ye 
have  brought  an  offering  unto  your 
God :  it  shall  be  a  statute  for  ever 
throughout  your  generations  in  all 
your  dwellings. 

15  ^  And  lye  shall  count  unto 
you  from  the  morrow  after  the 
sabbath,  from  the  day  that  ye 
brought  the  sheaf  of  the  wave-of- 
fering; seven  sabbaths  shall  be 
complete: 

1  ch.  25.  8.     Exod.  34.  21.     Deut,  16.  9. 


source  from  whence  the  crowning  bless- 
ings of  life  proceeded.  As  God  was  the 
bountiful  donor  of  the  blessings  of  the 
harvest,  it  was  an  ordinance  which 
would  find  a  response  in  every  right 
heart,  that  he  should  first  be  honored 
with  its  fruits  before  his  creatures  should 
have  appropriated  any  part  of  them  to 
their  own  use.  This  universal  dictate 
of  a  grateful  bosom  found  a  fitting  ex- 
pression in  the  customs  of  the  ancient 
Romans,  of  whom  Pliny  says,  '  Ne  gus- 
tabant  quidem  novas  fruges,  aut  vina, 
antequam  sacerdotes  priniitias  libas- 
sent,'  they  did  not  so  much  as  taste  of 
their  corn  or  wine,  till  the  priests  had 
offered  the  first  fruits. 

2.  Feast  of  Pentecost. 

15.  Ye  shall  count  unto  you,  &c. 
From  the  day  of  waving  the  sheaf  they 
were  to  count  seven  sabbaths  or  weeks 
complete,  or  forty-nine  daysj  and  then 
was  to  be  celebrated  the  second  or  great 
harvest-festival,  called  Pentecost,  from 
the  Gr.  TievrriKoaTT),  fifty,  from  its  begin- 
x\\n% fifty  days  after  the  waving  of  the 
sheaf  of  the  first  fruits. 

The  Feast  of  Pentecost,  here  insti- 
tuted, is  called  by  various  names  in  the 
sacred  writings,  as  '  the  feast  of  weeks/ 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 


16  Even  unto  the  morrow  after 
the  seventh  sabbath  shall  ye  num- 
ber m  fifty  days  ;  and  ye  shall  offer 
na  new  meat-offering  unto  the 
Lord. 

17  Ye  shall  bring  out  of  your 
habitations  two  wave-loaves  of  two 
lenth-deals :  they  shall  be  of  fine 
flour,  they  shall  be  baken  with 
leaven,  they  are  o  the  first-fruits 
unto  the  Lord. 

IS  And  ye  shall  offer  with  the 
bread  seven  lambs  without  blemish 
of  the  first  year,  and  one  young 
bullock,  and  two  rams :  they  shall 
be  for  a  burnt-offering  unto  the 
Lord,   with    their    meat-offering, 

m  Acts  -2.  1.     u  Numb.  28.  26.     o  Exod.  23. 

16,  19.  and  22.  29,  and  34.  22,  26.     Numb.  15. 

17,  aud  28.  20.     Deut  26.  1. 

Ex.  34.22  ;  Deut.  16.  10,  16,  because  of 
its  being  celebrated  a  week  of  weeks, 
or  seven-weeks,  after  the  feast  of  un- 
leavened  bread  ;  the  '  feast  of  harvest,' 
Y.x.  23.  16;  and  also  the  '  day  of  first 
fiuils,' Num.  16.  26;  for  this  was  pro- 
perly the  harvest-festival  at  which  the 
Israelites  were  to  olTer  thanksgivings 
to  God  for  the  bounties  of  the  harvest, 
and  to  present  to  him  the  first  fruits 
thereof  in  bread  baked  of  the  new  corn. 
It  seems,  in  fact,  that  the  barley  har- 
vest commenced  about  the  Passover, 
and  the  wheat  harvest  ended  at  the 
Pentecost  in  Palestine,  where,  as  in 
Egypt,  the  barley  is  ripe  considerably 
earlier  than  the  wheat.  This  festival 
lasted  for  seven  days,  during  which 
many  holocausts  and  offerings  for  sin 
were  sacrificed.  In  later  times  many 
Jews  from  foreign  countries  came  to 
Jerusalem  on  this  joyful  occasion. 
Even  at  tliat  time,  and  still  more  since 
then,  a  greater  degree  of  relative  im- 
portance seems  to  have  been  attached 
to  this  festival  than  appears  to  have 
been  designed  by  the  law.  It  was  dis- 
covereil  that  the  date,  fifty  days  after 
the  Passover,  coincided  with  the  deliv- 
ery  of   the  law    from    Mount    Sinai, 


and  their  drink-offerings,  even  an 
offering  made  by  fire  of  sweet  sa- 
vour unto  the  Lord. 

19  Then  ye  shall  sacrifice  pone 
kid  of  the  goats  for  a  sin-offering, 
and  two  lambs  of  the  first  year  for 
a  sacrifice  of  q  peace-offerings. 

20  And  the  priest  shall  wave  them 
with  the  bread  of  the  first-fruits 
for  a  wave-offering  before  the 
Lord,  with  the  two  lambs  :  r  ihey 
shall  be  holy  to  the  Lord  for  the 
priest. 

21  And  ye  shall  proclaim  on  the 
self-same  day,  that  it  may  be  an 
holy  convocation  unto  you:  ye 
shall  do  no  servile  work  therein: 
it  shall  be  a  statute  for  ever  in  all 

P  ch.  4.  23,  23.  Numb.  28.  SO.  q  ch.  3.  1. 
r  Numb.  13.  12.     Deut.  18.  4. 


which  was  fifty  days  after  the  depart- 
ure from  Egypt,  and  consequently  after 
the  first  Passover.  Hence,  by  degrees, 
instead  of  resting  on  the  ground  on 
which  Moses  placed  it,  the  festival  was 
turned  into  a  commemoration  of  that 
great  event. 

17.  Ye  shall  bring  out  of  your  habila- 
ations.  That  is.  not  out  of  their  houses, 
but  out  of  some  one  or  more  of  the 
several  places  or  regions  where  they 
abode,  as  explained  above,  in  the  Note 
on  V.  3.  It  cannot  be  supposed  to  mean 
that  each  locality  where  Israelites  re- 
sided furnished  two  wave  loaves,  for 
there  were  to  be  but  two  for  the  whole 
nation ;  but  the  leading  idea  is,  that  the 
flour  was  to  be  supplied  from  some 
place  in  the  country,  and  was  then  of- 
fered in  the  name  of  the  whole  congre- 
gation, together  with  the  seven  lambs, 
the  young  bullock,  the  two  rams,  the 
kid,  and  the  two  lambs  ;  all  which  were 
no  doubt  furnished  at  the  common 
charges  of  the  whole  people.  As  the 
loaves  were  not  to  be  burnt  on  the  altar, 
they  were  allowed  to  be  made  of  leaven, 
without  contradicting  ch.  2.  11,  12. 

21.  Ye  shall  do  no  servile  work  there' 
in.     This  the  Jews  understood  of  every 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


your  dwellings  throughout  your 
generations. 

22  H  And  swhen  ye  reap  the 
harvest  of  your  land,  thou  shalt 
not  make  clean  riddance  of  the 
corners  of  thy  field  when  thou 
reapest,  t  neither  shalt  thou  gather 
any  gleaning  of  thy  harvest:  thou 
shah  leave  them  unto  the  poor, 

s  ch.  19.  9.    t  Deut.  24.  19. 

kind  of  labor  except  that  which  per- 
tained to  the  preparation  of  food.  It 
properly  denotes  that  more  laborious 
kind  of  service  which  we  understand  by 
drudgery,  such  as  ploughing,  sowing, 
reaping,  threshing,  gathering  the  vint- 
age, &c. 

22.  When  ye  reap  the  harvest,  &c. 
See  Note  on  Lev.  19.  9.  Comp.  Deut. 
24.  19. 

3.  The  Feast  of  Trumpets. 
24.  A  memorial  of  blowing  of  trum- 
pets. Heb.  nS'inn  "^ll-T  zikron  te- 
rudh,  which  the  Chal.  renders  a  memo- 
rial of  shouting.  As  the  word  in  the 
original  for  memorial  has  the  sense  of 
celebrating  or  commemorating  uith 
praise,  the  innport  of  the  language  un- 
doubtedly is,  '  A  festival  for  commem- 
orating or  praising  God  with  the  sound 
of  trunnpets.'  It  was  observed  with 
great  solemnity,  the  trumpets  sounding 
from  sun-rise  to  sun-set.  The  priest 
wTio  sounded  the  first  trumpet,  began 
with  the  usual  prayer,  '  Blessed  be  God 
who  hath  sanctified  us  by  his  precepts,' 
&c.,  subjoining,  <  Blessed  be  God  who 
hath  hitherto  preserved  us  in  life,  and 
brought  us  unto  this  time.'  After  this 
the  people  repeated  with  a  loud  voice 
the  following  words  from  Ps.  88.  15: 
'  Blessed  is  the  people  who  know  the 
joyful  sound,'  &c.  As  the  feast  of  new 
moons  was  the  sanctifying  of  each 
month,  so  the  feast  of  trumpets  was  the 
sanctifying  of  each  year,  and  a  remind- 
ing of  the  Israelites  that  all  their  times 
were  in  God's  hand.     How  rational  and 


and  to  the  stranger  :  I  am  the  Lord 
your  God. 

23  If  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

24  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, saying.  In  the  "  seventh  month 
in  the  first  day  of  the  month,  shall 
ye  have  a  sabbath,  x  a  memorial  of 
blowing  of  trumpets,  an  holy  con- 
vocation. 

u  Numb.  29.  1.     x  ch.  25.  9. 


dignified  was  this  conduct  throughout 
the  land  of  Judea,  w^hen  compared  with 
the  general  practice  of  other  nations  ! 
For,  instead  of  making  the  new  year  a 
day  of  devotion,  it  is  commonly  a  day 
of  idleness  and  dissipation.  At  the 
present  day,  as  we  are  told  by  Calmet, 
Leo  of  Modena,  Buxtorf,  and  Basnage, 
the  Jews  are  accustomed  on  this  even- 
ing to  wish  one  another  a  good  year,  to 
make  better  cheer  than  ordinary,  and 
to  sound  the  trumpet  thirty  times  sue- 
cessively.  During  this  feast,  which 
lasts,  it  seems,  the  first  two  days  of  the 
year,  business  is  suspended,  and  they 
hold,  by  tradition,  that  on  this  day  God 
particularly  judges  the  actions  of  the 
foregoing  year,  and  disposes  the  events 
of  the  year  following.  Wherefore,  on 
the  first  days  of  the  foregoing  month,  or 
eight  days  at  least  before  the  least  of 
trumpets,  they  generally  apply  them- 
selves to  works  of  penitence,  and  the 
evening  before  the  feast  many  of  them 
receive  39  lashes  by  way  of  discipline. 
On  the  first  evening  of  the  year,  and 
which  precedes  the  first  day  of  Tizri 
(for  their  evening  precedes  their  morn- 
ing,) as  they  return  from  the  synagogue 
they  say  to  one  another,  '  May  you  be 
written  in  a  good  year  ;'  to  which  the 
other  answers,  '  And  you  also.'  On 
their  return  home,  they  serve  up  at  ta- 
ble honey  and  unleavened  bread,  and 
whatever  may  signify  a  plentiful  and 
happy  year.  Some  of  them,  on  the 
morning  of  these  two  feasts,  go  to  the 
synagogue  clothed  in  white,  in  token  of 
purity  and  penitence.    Among  the  G  ,r- 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 


S39 


25  Ye  shall  do  no  servile  work 
therein  ;  but  ye  shall  offer  an  offer- 
ing made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord. 

26  ^  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

27  y  Also  on  the  tenth  day  of  this 
seventh  month  thej'e  shall  be  a  day 
of  atonement ;  it  shall  be  an  holy 

y  ch.  16.  30.    Numb.  29.  7. 

man  Jews,  some  wear  the  habit  whrch 
they  have  appointed  for  their  burial, 
and  this  is  done  as  a  mortification. 

On  this  day  they  repeat  in  the  syna- 
gogues several  appropriate  prayers  and 
benedictions.  They  take  the  Penta- 
teuch very  solemnly  from  its  chest,  and 
call  upon  five  persons  to  read  the  por- 
tion which  describes  the  sacrifice  that 
was  appointed  for  that  day  ;  then  they 
twenty  times  sound  a  horn,  sometimes 
very  slowly,  and  at  other  times  quickly, 
to  remind  them,  as  they  explain  it,  of 
the  judgments  of  God,  to  intimidate 
sinners,  and  induce  them  to  repent. 
After  prayers  they  return  to  their 
houses,  to  take  some  refreshment,  and 
spend  the  rest  of  the  day  in  hearing  ser- 
mons, and  in  other  exercises  of  devo- 
tion. The  two  days  of  the  feast  being 
observed  exactly  in  the  same  manner,  a 
more  particular  description  of  the  lat- 
ter would  be  unnecessary.  It  may, 
however,  be  remarked,  with  respect  to 
their  preparation  for  the  feast,  that 
many  of  the  Jews  plunge  themselves  in 
cold  water,  confessing,  as  they  descend 
into  it,  their  numerous  sins,  and  beating 
their  breasts  ;  and  they  plunge  them- 
selves over  the  head,  that  they  may 
appear  entirely  clean  before  God,  for 
they  think  that,  on  this  day,  God  as- 
sembles his  council,  or  his  angels,  and 
that  he  opens  his  book  to  judge  all  men. 
Three  sorts  of  books,  they  imagine,  are 
opened  ;  viz.  the  book  of  life  for  the 
just ;  the  book  of  death  for  the  wicked  ; 
and  the  book  of  a  middle  state,  for  such 
as  are  neither  very  good  nor  very  bad. 
In  the  two  books  of  life  and  death  they 
conceive  there  are  two  kinds  of  pages, 


convocation  unto  you,  and  ye  shall, 
afflict  your  souls,  and  offer  an  offer- 
ing made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord. 

28  And  ye  shall  do  no  work  in 
that  same  day ;  for  it  is  a  day  of 
atonement  to  make  an  atonement 
for  you  before  the  Lord  your  God. 

29  For  whatsoever  soul  it  be  that 
shall  not  be  afflicted  in  that  same 


one  for  this  life,  and  the  other  for  the 
next ;  for  it  often  happens  that  ihe 
wicked  are  not  punished  in  this  life 
according  to  their  demerits,  whereas 
the  just  suffer  severely,  as  if  they  had 
incurred  the  displeasure  of  God.  This 
conduct  of  the  Almighty  is  the  reason 
why  no  one  can  be  sure  of  his  state, 
but  is  uncertain  whether  he  be  worthy 
to  be  loved  or  haled.  With  respect  to 
the  middle  class,  they  think  that  they 
are  not  written  down  any  where,  for 
God  delays  it  till  the  day  of  annual  ex- 
piation, which  is  the  tenth  day  after, 
to  see  if  they  will  reform  ;  and  then 
their  sentence  is  fixed  either  for  life  or 
death.  Such  are  the  ceremonies  with 
which  the  modern  Jews  are  said  to  ob- 
serve the  feast  of  trumpets ;  but  it 
should  ever  be  recollected,  that  these 
ceremonies  are  far  from  being  universal ; 
for  in  countries  where  superstition  pre- 
vails, they  insensibly  become  tinctured 
with  it,  and  in  countries  where  a  more 
rational  mode  of  thinking  is  general, 
they  as  naturally  adopt  a  more  rational 
ritual. 

4.  The  Day  of  Atonement. 
27-32.  On  the  tenth  day  of  this  sev- 
enth month,  there  shall  be  a  day  of 
atonement.  This  was  properly  an  an- 
nual fast,  and  the  only  one  prescribed 
by  the  law,  however  fasts  may  abound 
in  the  presei>t  calendar  of  the  Jews.  It 
occurred  on  the  fi(th  day  before  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles,  or  on  the  tenth 
of  the  seventh  month,  Tisri  (October). 
On  this  day  they  were  to  abstain  from 
I  all  servile  work,  to  take  no  food  '  from 
I  evening  to  evening,'  during  which  thej 


240 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


day,  a  he  shall  be  cut  off  from 
among  his  people. 

30  And  whatsoever  soul  it  be  that 
doeth  any  work  in  that  same  day, 
a  the  same  soul  will  I  destroy  from 
among  his  people. 

31  Ye  shall  do  no  manner  of 
work :  it  shall  be  a  statute  for  ever 
throughout  your  generations  in  all 
your  dwellings. 

32  It  shall  be  unto  you  a  sabbath 
of  rest,  and  ye  shall  afflict  your 

z  Gen.  17.  14.     a  ch.  20.  3,  5,  6. 

were  to  '  afflict  their  souls.'  The  sa- 
crificial services  of  this  day  were  the 
most  solemn  in  all  the  year,  but  as  we 
have  more  fully  considered  the  details 
of  the  festival  in  our  Notes  on  the  I6lh 
chapter,  it  will  be  unnecessary  to  re- 
peat them  here. 

5.  The  Feast  of  Tabernacles. 

34.  The  fifteenth  day  of  the  seventh 
month  shall  be  the  feast  of  tabernacles. 
This  festival  is  termed  in  Hebrew  3n 
tn^til'hag  hassukoth,  feast  of  tents, 
or  booths,hui  by  the  Chal.  is  called  '  the 
shade  of  clouds,'  in  allusion  to  the  sha- 
dow of  the  di%une  protection  in  the  pil- 
lar of  cloud  that  attended  the  Israelites 
in  their  journey  through  the  wilderness. 

The  Feast  of  Tabernacles  was  insti- 
tuted in  memoryof  the  journey  through 
the  Arabian  wilderness,  and  therefore 
the  people,  during  its  continuance, 
dwelt  in  booths.  This  lasted  seven 
days,  from  the  15th  to  the  22d  of  the 
seventh  month,  Tisri  (October).  It 
is  usual  to  state  that  another  object  of 
this  feast  was  as  a  Feast  of  In-gather- 
ing, to  return  thanks,  and  to  rejoice  for 
the  completed  vintage  and  gathering  in 
of  the  fruits.  But  a  close  examination 
will  make  it  probable  that  this  was  the 
separate  object  of  the  eighth  day, 
which  was  added  to  the  seven  :  for  it 
was  only  during  the  seven  days  that  the 
people  were  to  dwell  in  booths.  Being 
thus  closely  connected,  they  got  to  be 
regarded  as  one  festival,  and  the  names 


I  souls :  in  the  ninthrfay  of  the  month 
at  even,  from  even  unto  even,  shall 
ye  celebrate  your  sabbath. 

33  H  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 

34  Speak  unto  the  children  of 
Israel,  saying,  b  The  fifteenth  day 
of  this  seventh  month  shall  be  the 
feast  of  labernacles/or  seven  days 
unto  the  Lord. 


b  Exod.  23.  16.  Numb.  29.  12.  Deut.  16. 
13.  Ezra  3.  4.  Neh.  S.  14.  Zech.  14.  16. 
John  7.  2. 


were  confounded  and  interchanged,  as 

in  the   analogous  case  of  the  Passover 

j  and  Feast   of  Unleavened  Bread.     In* 

j  stead,   therefore,  of  regarding   this  as 

i  one  festival   of  eiglit  days,   with   two 

names  and  two  objects,  it  seems  best  to 

I  regard  it  as  a  union  of  two  festivals 

with  different  names  and  objects,  the 

one  of  seven  days,  and  the  other  of  one 

day. 

As  in  the  other  festivals  of  a  week's 
duration,  the  first  and  last  days  were  to 
;  be  observed  as  Sabbaths,  with   the  ex- 
I  ception  that  only  servile  labor  was  m- 
j  terdicted.    On  the  other  five  days  any 
j  kind  of  work  might  be  executed.     Dur- 
!  ing  all  the  seven  the  people  were  to  live 
:  in  booths  made  of  branches  of  several 
[  sorts  of  trees,  which,  as  mentioned  in 
Lev.  23.  40,  are   the  palm,  the  willow, 
and  two  others,  which  seem  to  denote 
'beautiful  trees,'    and    any  'thick  or 
bushy  wood,'  rather  than  any   particu- 
lar species.    Those  named  in  Nehem. 
8.  15,  are  different,  and  it  seems  reason- 
able  to  conclude  that  it  was  not  the 
intention  of  the  law  to  compel  the  use 
of  any  particular  species,  but  only  such 
as  were   suitable   for  the  purpose  and 
could  be  easily  procured.    It  is  not  ex- 
pressly said  in  the  law  that  the  booths 
were  to  be  made  with  those  branches, 
though  the  language  of  the  text  with 
the  context,  obviously  leads  to  that  con- 
clusion.   It  was  so  understood  in  the 
time  of  Nehemiah.     But  the  Sadducees 
and  Pharisees,  in  later  days,  split  oo 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 


241 


35  On  the  first  day  shall  be  a  holy 
convocation  :  ye  shall  do  no  servile 

work  therein. 
.'i6  Seven  days  ye  shall  offer  an 
offering  made  by  fire  unto  the 
Lord;  con  the  eighth  day  shall 
be  a  holy  convocation  unto  you, 
and  ye  shall  offer  an  offering  made 
by  fire  unto  the  Lord:  it  is  a  ^ sol- 
emn assembly ;  ayid  ye  shall  do  no 
servile  work  therein. 


^  Numb.  29.  35.  Neh.  8.  18. 
■^  Deut.  16.  8.  2  Chron.  7.  9. 
Joel.  J.    14,  and  2.  15. 


John  7. 
Neh.   8. 


tliis  point  ;  the  former  understanding 
(hat  the  booths  were  to  be  made  of 
'Jie  boughs,  while  the  latter  contended 
that  they  were  to  be  borne  rejoicingly 
in  the  hands.  The  latter  practice  pre- 
vailed ill  the  time  of  Christ,  as  it  does 
to  this  day.  The  Karaites,  however, 
follow  the  interpretation  of  the  Saddu- 
cees,  which  seems  to  be  the  right  one, 
although  it  must  be  confessed  that  the 
Israelites  did  not,  in  the  Arabian  wil- 
derness dwell  in  green  booths,  but  in 
tents.  It  seems  that  the  people  often 
made  their  booths  on  the  flat  roofs  of 
their  houses.  More  public  sacrifies 
were  to  be  offered  on  this  festival  than 
on  any  of  the  others,  as  may  be  seen  in 
Num.29.  12-39.  This  feast  was  cele- 
braled  with  more  of  outward  glee  than 
any  others,  though  without  intemper- 
advjc,  to  which  the  Hebrews  as  a  nation, 
Qii  rot  appear  to  have  been  ever  much 
addicted.  The  ceremonies  of  parading  in 
procession  with  branches,  chanting  ho- 
^iinnas,  and  of  drawing  water  from  the 
pool  of  Siloam,  to  pour  out,  mixed  with 
»vinc,  on  the  sacrifice  as  it  lay  on  the 
altar,  existed  in  the  time  of  Christ,  and 
before  5  but  they  rest  rather  upon  tra- 
dition than  upon  any  express  law  of 
Moses.  The  eighth  day,  which  we  re- 
gard as  the  proper  Feast  of  In-gather- 
ing, was  kept  as  a  Sabbath  (and  some^ 
times  must  actually  have  been  one) 
like  the  first  of  the  tabernacle  feasts. 
Notwithstanding  its  being  a  distinct 
ft'siival,  the  sacrifices  for  it  were  less 
21 


37  e  These  are  the  feasts  of  the 
Lord,  which  ye  shall  proclaim  to 
be  holy  convocations,  to  offer  an 
offering  made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord, 
a  burnt-offering,  and  a  raeat-ofler- 
ing,  a  sacrifice,  and  drink-offerings, 
every  thing  upon  his  day  : 

38  ffiesides  the  sabbaths  of  the 
Lord,  and  besides  your  gifts,  and 
besides  all  your  vows,  and  besides 
all  your  free-will-offerings,  which 
ye  give  unto  the  Lord. 

e  ver.  2.  4.     f  Numb.  29.  39, 

than   those  of  any  of   the    preceding 
seven  days. 

36.  It  is  a  solemn  assembly.  Heb. 
5<in  ti^lZ^  atzereth  hi,  rendered  in  the 
margin  a  day  of  restraint.  This  is  a 
new  term,  which  does  not  occur  pre* 
viously  in  reference  to  any  of  the  feasts 
here  mentioned,  and  is  of  somewhat 
difficult  interpretation.  As  the  verbal 
root  12r5>  utzar  signifies  to  shut  up,  to 
close,  Theodoret  renders  it  to  teXos  rwv 
eoproji'jthe  conclusion  of  the  feast.  So 
also  the  Gr.  of  the  lxx.  has  e^o6iov, 
outgoing,  or  close.  The  term  is  applied 
to  the  last  or  concluding  day  of  the 
feast  of  unleavened  bread,  Deut.  16.  8, 
and  Josephus  remarks,  that  the  feast  of 
Pentecost,  which  was  kept  at  the  end 
of  seven  computed  weeks,  was  called 
aaapda,  asartha,  evidently  from  the  Heb. 
original.  This,  therefore,  as  it  was  the 
lOrSt,  so  it  was  the  great  day  of  the  feast, 
as  it  is  termed  by  the  Evangelist,  John 
7.  37.  From  this  it  would  seem  that 
any  great  solemnity  or  assemblage  is 
called  by  this  name  of  Ti^lSJ  atzereth, 
as  2  Kings  10.  20,  Joel  1.  14;  although 
Gesenius  maintains  that  the  noun  de- 
rives the  meaning  of  assemblage  from 
that  sense  of  the  root  which  he  renders 
to  stay,  restrain,  constrain  ■  which  is 
equivalent  to  the  explication  of  the 
Jewish  doctors,  who  make  it  as  imply- 
ing restraint  or  detention,  inasmuch  as 
they  were  detained  at  Jerusalem  one 
day  longer  than  on  any  other  festival, 
none  of  which  lasted  more  than  seven 


242 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


39  Also  in  the  fifteenth  day  of  the  40  And  i>ye  shall  take  you  on  the 
seventh  month,  when  ye  have  first  day  the  boughs  of  goodly  trees, 
g gathered  in  the  fruit  of  the  land,  branches  of  palm-trees,  and  the 
ye  shall  keep  a  feast  unto  the  Lord    boughs  of  thick  trees,  and  willow^s 

of  the  brook;  i  and  ye  shall  rejoice 
before  the  Lord  your  God  seven 
days. 

hNeh.S.  15.     iDeut.  16.  14,  15. 


seven  days :  on  the  first  day  shall 
be  a  sabbath,  and  on  the  eighth  day 
shall  be  a  sabbath. 

g  Exod.  23.  16.     Deut.  16.  13. 

days.  It  is  one  of  the  cases  where  the 
import  of  the  original  is  unavoidably 
left  doubtful. 

39.  Also  in  the  fifteenth  day,  &c. 
There  is  here  no  new  injunction,  but 
merely  a  reiteration  and  enforcement 
of  what  was  said  before.  It  is  simply 
an  amplification  of  the  particulars  of  the 
feast  of  tabernacles.  The  particle  '  also' 
therefore  should  be  rendered  '  surely,' 
'  truly,'  or  something  equivalent. 

40.  Ye  shall  take  you  on  the  first  day 
the  boughs  of  goodly  trees.  Heb.  ^15 
lin  f  y  peri  ttz  hddar,  the  fruit  of 
the  tree  of  goodliness,  or  honor  ;  im- 
plying probably  that  branches  were 
taken  with  the  fruit  as  well  as  the  leaves 
upon  them,  wherever  such  could  be 
conveniently  obtained.  Otherwise  com- 
mon fruitless  boughs  were  doubtless  to 
be  made  use  of.  Their  booths  were  a 
kind  of  arbors.  Maimonides,  the  ora- 
cle of  the  Jews,  following  the  Jerusalem 
Targum,  contends  that  the  citron  or 
pome-citron,  is  the  particular  tree  whose 
loughs  were  taken  on  this  occasion  ; 
and  so  firm  in  this  persuasion  are  even 
the  modern  Jews,  that  they  fancy  the 
feast  cannot  be  duly  celebrated  without 
such  branches.  Numbers,  therefore,  of 
the  German  Jews  send  annaally  into 
Spain,  to  procure  a  quantity  of  branches 
with  the  citrons  upon  them ;  and  when 
the  feast  is  over  they  distribute  them 
as  a  gift  of  great  value  to  their  friends. 

IT  Branches  of  palm-trees.    These 

jranches,  as  also  the  others  mentioned 
in  tliis  connexion,  the  Sadducees  under- 
stood to  be  for  making  their  booths,  but 
the  Pharisees  contend  that  they  were  to 
be  carried  in  their  hands  ;  which  is  the 
practice  of  the  modern  Jews  to  this  day. 


They  lie  together  one  branch  of  palm^ 
three  branches  of  myrtle,  and  one  of 
willow.  This  they  carry  in  their  right 
hands,  and  in  their  left  they  have  a 
brauch  of  citron  with  its  fruit,  whenever 
they  can  procure  it.  With  these  they 
make  a  procession  in  their  synagogues 
every  day  of  the  feast,  that  is,  for  seven 
days,  around  their  reading  desks,  as 
their  ancestors  did  around  the  walls  of 
Jericho,  in  token  of  the  expected  down- 
fall  of  their  enemies.  While  making 
this  procession,  they  sing  *  Hosannah,' 
whence  the  feast  itself  is  sometimes 
called  by  the  Rabbins  '  the  Hosannah  ,' 
and  sometimes  the  branches  are  called 
by  the  same  name.  On  the  last  great 
day,  which  they  call  '  Hosannah  Kab- 
bah,' or  '  the  great  Hosannah,'  they 
make  the  procession  seven  limes  toge- 
ther, in  memory  of  the  siege  of  Jericho. 
The  form  of  the  Hosannah  in  their  rit- 
ual, which  they  sing  on  this  occasion, 
is  remarkable : — 

For  thy  sake,  0  our  Creator,  Hosannah. 
For  thy  sake,  O  our  Redeemer,  Hosannah. 
For  thy  sake,  0  our  Seeker,  Hosannah. 

This  would  seem  to  be  a  virtual  calling 
upon  the  blessed  Trinity  to  save  them 
and  send  them  help. 

Another  distinguishing  ceremony  on 
this  occasion  was  the  pouring  out  of 
water,  the  manner  of  which  was  as  fol- 
lows : — One  of  the  priests,  with  a  golden 
flagon,  went  to  the  pool  of  Siloam  or 
Bttlhesda,  where,  filling  it  with  water, 
he  returned  to  the  court  of  the  priests 
by  the  gate  on  the  south  side  of  the 
court  of  Israel,  thence  called  the  Water 
Gate  ;  and  no  sooner  did  he  appear, 
than    the  silver  trumpets    sounded  to 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 


243 


41  k  And  ye  shall  keep  it  a  feasl 
unto  the  Lord  seven  days  in  the 
year :  it  shall  he  a  statute  for  ever 
in  your  generations  ;  ye  shall  cele- 
brate it  in  the  seventh  nionih. 

42  lYe  shall  dwell  in  booths 
seven  days;  all  that  are  Israelites 
born  shall  dwell  in  booths : 

k  Numb.  29  12.  Neh.  8.  IS.  I  Neh.  8. 
14,  15,  16. 


announce  his  arrival.  He  continued  to 
advance  and  went  directly  to  the  lop  of 
the  altar,  to  the  two  basons  that  stood, 
the  one  with  the  wine  for  the  ordinary 
drinU-oifering,  the  other  for  the  water 
whicli  he  had  brought ;  where,  pouring 
tlie  water  into  the  empty  bason,  he 
mixed  the  wine  and  water  together,  and 
afterwards  poured  out  both  together  by 
way  of  libation.  There  is  nothing  said 
about  this  part  of  the  ceremonies  in  the 
law  of  Moses,  but  the  Jews  pretend  to 
find  authority  for  it  in  Is.  12.  3,  '  With 
joy  shall  ye  draw  water  out  of  the  wells 
ol"  salvation.'  The  conjecture  of  Pa- 
trick is  far  more  probable,  that  it  was 
in  memory  of  the  water  which  followed 
them  during  all  the  time  of  iheir  so- 
journing in  the  wilderness.  It  is  sup- 
posed that  our  Savior  alludes  to  this 
custom,  where  it  is  said,  John  7.  37,  38, 
'  In  the  last  day,  that  great  day  of  the 
feast,  Jesus  stood  and  cried,  If  any  man 
thirst,  let  him  come  unto  me,  and  drink. 
He  that  believelh  on  me,  as  the  Scrip- 
ture hath  said,  out  of  his  belly  shall 
flow  rivers  of  living  water.'  This  was 
a  season  of  so  much  rejoicing,  that  it 
passed  into  a  common  proverb,  that 
'  he  that  never  saw  the  rejoicing  of 
drawing  water,  never  saw  rejoicing  in 
his  life.' 

42.  Ye  shall  dwell  in  booths.  Heb. 
irrn  nrcn  besukkoth  teshebu,  ye  shall 
sit  (abide)  in  booths.  These  were 
afterwards,  in  Jerusalem,  constructed 
on  the  tops  of  their  houses,  in  their 
court-yards,  and  in  the  streets.  Neh. 
8.  16.  They  were  made  of  the  branches 
of  various  trees,  as  before  remarked, 


43  mThat  your  generations  may 
know  that  I  made  the  children  of 
Israel  to  dwell  in  booths,  when  I 
brought  them  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt :  I  am  the  Lord  your  God. 

44  And  Moses  n  declared  unto 
the  children  of  Israel  the  feasts  of 
the  Lord. 

m  Deut.  31.  13.     Ps.  78.  5,  6.     n  yer.  2. 

V.  15,  and  the  Hebrew  canons  affirm 
that  they  were  not  to  be  covered  with 
any  kind  of  cloth,  or  any  thing  that  had 
not  grown  out  of  the  earth,  or  with 
aught  that  was  faded  or  withered,  or 
that  had  an  ill  savor,  or  that  was  in  any 
way  unclean.  Mairnonides  observes 
that  this  feast  was  fixed  to  that  season 
when  the  people  could  dwell  in  booths 
with  the  least  inconvenience,  as  the 
weather  was  then  moderate,  and  they 
were  not  wont  to  be  troubled  either 
with  heat  or  with  rain. 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 

In  the  series  of  the  foregoing  chap- 
ters we  have  seen  that,  after  the  setting 
up  of  the  tabernacle,  directions  were 
given  as  to  the  several  kinds  of  sacri- 
fices that  should  be  offered,  and  the 
personal  qualifications  of  those  that 
should  offer  them.  Aaron  and  his  sons 
having  been  duly  consecrated,  care  is 
taken  that  none  of  their  posterity  should 
minister  before  God  but  such  as  were 
every  way  perfect ;  nor  were  any  blem- 
ished animals  ever  to  be  allowed  to 
come  upon  the  sacred  altar.  The  order 
of  the  several  anniversary  festivals 
having  been  also  determined  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapter,  the  writer  comes  in  the 
present  to  treat  of  the  daily  service  of 
God  in  the  sanctuary,  which  was  not 
fully  settled  in  all  its  details  till  the 
princes  had  made  their  offerings,  Num. 
7.  1,2,  &c.  Its  contents,  however,  are 
somewhat  of  a  varied  character,  several 
items  of  an  incidental  nature  being  in- 
troduced in  the  course  of  it. 


au 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


CHAPTER  XXIV.  1 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo-  i 
ses,  saying, 

2  a  Command  the  children  of  Is-  i 
rael,  thai  they  bring  unto  thee  pure 
oil-olive  beaten  for   the   light,   to 
cause    the    lamps    to    burn    con- 
tinually. 

3  Without  the  vail  of  the  testi- 
mony, in  the  tabernacle  of  the  con- 
gregation, shall  Aaron  order  it  from 
the  evening  unto  the  morning  be- 
fore the  Lord  continually  :  it  shall 
be  a  statute  for  ever  in  your  gene- 
rations. 

a  Exod.  27.  -20,  21. 


The  Oil  for  the  Lamps. 

2,  To  cause  the  lamps  to  burn.  Heb. 
"n:  rj^NIp  lehaaloth  ni'r,  to  cause  the 
lamp  to  ascend  •  i.  e.  the  light  or  flame 
of  the  lamp.  Our  version  gives  '  lamps,' 
in  the  plural,  although  the  Heb.  has 
'lamp.'  Yet  in  v.  4,  the  original  has 
'  lamps,'  plural.  It  is  doubtless  used 
here  as  a  collective,  all  the  seven 
lamps  being  considered  as  forming  but 
one.  In  like  manner,  and  in  direct  al- 
lusion to  this,  tlie  Holy  Spirit,  though 
one,  is  represented  by  '  seven  lamps  of 
fire  before  the  throne,'  Rev.  4.  5  ;  for 
there  are  'diversities  of  gifts,  but  one 
spirit.'     Comp.  Ex.  21.  20,  Num.  8.  2, 

1  Sam.  3.  3. IT  Continually.     Heb. 

"■"/Cri  tamid.  That  is,  from  night  to 
night  ;  not  without  intermission.  So 
the  *  continual  burnt-offering'  means 
that  wliich  was  regularly  offered  at  the 
appointed  season.  So  Mephibosheth 
was  to  eat  bread  at  David's  table  con- 
tinually,  i.  e.  at  the  stated  hours  of 
meals,  2  Sam.  9.  7,  13.  In  like  manner 
when  the  Apostle  says,  1  Thess.  3.  17, 
*  Pray  without  ceasmg,'  his  meaning 
undoubtedly  is,  that  they  were  to  pray 
constantly,  morning  and  evening,  at  the 
stated  hours  of  prayer. 

3.  Without  the  vail  of  the  testimony. 
That  is,  '  without  the  second  vail,'  as  it 
is  termed,  Heb.  9.  3,  which  separated 


4  He  shall  order  the  lamps  upon 
b  the  pure  candlestick  before  the 
Lord  continually. 

5  H  And  thou  shah  take  fine  flour, 
and  bake  twelve  c  cakes  thereof: 
two  tenth-deals  shall  be  in  one  cake. 

6  And  thou  shaltset  them  in  two 
rows,  six  on  a  row,  ^  upon  the  pure 
table  before  the  Lord. 

7  And  thou  shall  put  pure  frank- 
incense upon  each  row,  that  it  may 
be  on  the  bread  for   a  memorial, 


b  Exod.  31.  8,  and  39.  37.  c  Exod.  25.  30. 
d  1  Kings  7.  48.  2  Chron.  4.  19,  and  13.  11. 
Heb.  9.  2. 


between  the  holy  and  most  holy  place. 
'Die  ark  of  the  covenant  is  here  called 
'  the  testimony,'  because  it  contained 
the  tables  of  the  testimony,  as  they  are 
called,  Ex.25.  21. IT  From  the  eve- 
ning unto  the  morning.  The  Hebrew 
word  '^'22  boker,  properly  signifies  that 
portion  of  the  morning  which  inter- 
venes between  the  break  of  day  and 
sunrise.  The  other  word,  1^5  ereb, 
implies  the  time  from  sunset  to  dark. 
The  priests,  therefore,  were  to  look 
after  the  lamps  from  very  early  in  the 
morning  to  late  at  niglit. 

The  Ordering  of  the  Table  of  Shew- 
bread. 

6.  Thou  Shalt  set  them  in  two  rows 
six  in  a  row,  upon  the  pure  table  before 
the  Lord.  These  loaves  are  called 
elsewhere  the  '  bread  of  the  presence,' 
the  mystical  import  of  which  we  have 
fully  considered  in  the  Notes  on  Ex.  20. 
30.  They  were  prepared  by  the  Levites, 
and  were  twelve  in  number,  to  corres- 
pond with  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel. 
The  table  is  called  *  the  pure  table,' 
just  as  the  candlestick  is  called,  v.  4, 
*  the  pure  candlestick,'  from  the  pure 
gold  with  which  it  was  overlaid,  and 
which  was  doubtless  always  kept  clean 
and  bright. 

7.  That  it  may  be  on  the  bread  for  a 
memorial.    That  is,  that  the  frankiu- 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 


245 


even  an  oflfering  made  by  fire  unto 
the  Lord. 

8  e  Every  sabbath  he  shall  set  it 
in  order  before  the  Lord  continu- 
ally, <5»e?/j^  taken  from  the  children 
of  Israel  by  an  everlasting  covenant. 

9  And  fit  shall  be  Aaron's  and  his 

e  Numb.  4.  7.  1  Chron.  9.  32.  2  Chron. 
2.  4.  I  1  Sam.  21.  6.  Matt.  1-2.  4.  Mark  -2. 
26.  Luke  6.  4.  ?  Exod.  29.  33.  ch.  8.  3, 
and  21.  22. 


cense  may  be  burnt  upon  the  altar  of 
incense,  instead  of  the  bread  ;  as  the 
liandful  of  the  meal-offering  with  its  oil 
and  incense,  Lev.  2.  2,  was  to  be  a  me- 
morial of  the  whole.  The  frankin- 
cense stood  in  a  golden  saucer  upon  the 
bread  during  the  whole  week:  on  the 
Sabbath  the  bread  was  taken  away  to  be 
eaten,  and  the  frankincense  was  burnt 
in  lieu  of  it.  As  incense  is  a  symbol 
of  prayer,  there  may  have  been  an  inti- 
mation in  this  appointment,  that  our 
spiritual  food  is  to  be  received  and 
sanctified  with  prayer.  Indeed,  when 
a  good  man  sits  down  at  his  table  and 
invokes  the  divine  blessing  upon  his 
daily  food,  we  seem  to  see  the  realized 
substance  of  the  vessels  of  incense  upon 
the  Levilical  loaves. 

8.  Being  taken  from  the  children  of 
Israel.  It  was  taken  from  the  children 
of  Israel,  inasmuch  as  it  was  bought 
with  the  money  which  they  contributed. 
The  yearly  half-sliekel  tribute,  ordain- 
ed Ex.  30.  13,  16,  was  doubtless  devoted 
to  defraying  the  expenses  of  the  service 
of  the  sanctuary. 

Of  the  Blaspheming  Son  of  Shelomith. 
10.  The  son  of  an  Israelitish  woman 
whose  father  was  an  Egyptian,  went  out 
among  the  children  of  Israel,  &c.  The 
insertion  of  this  historical  narrative  in 
this  connexion,  in  the  midst  of  a  body 
of  ceremonial  and  moral  laws,  has  some- 
what of  a  singular  air,  but  may  perhaps 
be  satisfactorily  explained  Irom  the 
hint  afforded  v.  22, '  Ye  shall  have  one 
manner  of  law,  as  well  for  the  stranger, 
as  for  one  of  )'our  own  country  ;  for  I 
21* 


sons' ;  g  and  they  shall  eat  it  in  th# 
holy  place  :  for  it  is  most  holy  unto 
him  of  the  offerings  of  the  Lord 
made  by  fire  by  a  perpetual  statute. 
10  1[  And  the  son  of  an  Israelitish 
woman,  whose  father  was  an  Egyp- 
tian, went  out  among  the  children 
of  Israel ;  and  this  son  of  the  Israel- 
itish woman  and  a  man  of  Israel 
strove  together  in  the  camp  ; 


am  the  Lord  your  God.'  As  the  writer 
is  treating  in  the  present  chapter  of 
several  particulars  of  the  criminal  laws, 
the  question  would  naturally  arise  whe- 
ther and  how  far  those  laws  were  to 
bear  upon  foreigners,  dwelling  among 
them  as  proselytes.  The  answer  to 
this  question  is  not  only  expressly 
stated  in  v.  22,  but  the  pertinent  case 
of  the  Egyptian  Israelite  is  also  brought 
in  by  way  of  illustration.  The  original 
Hebrew,  as  rendered  literally,  runs 
thus : — '  And  there  went  out  a  son  of 
an  Israelitess,  and  he  the  son  of  an 
Egyptian  man,  in  the  midst  of,  or 
among  the  children  of  Israel,'  &c., 
which  the  Jewish  writers  generally  un- 
derstand as  implying  that  the  father 
was  a  proselyte  to  the  Hebrew  faith,  as 
Aben-ezra  in  particular  says,  '  he  was 
received  into  the  number  of  the  Jews.' 
This  is  not,  perhaps,  improbable  in 
itself,  lor  as  it  was  now  little  more  than 
a  year  since  they  came  out  of  Egypt, 
and  yet  his  son  was  old  enough  to  strive 
with  a  man  of  Israel,  he  had  no  doubt 
married  the  Israelitish  woman  at  least 
some  fifteen  or  twenty  years  before  the 
exodus  ;  and  if  so,  the  presumption 
would  no  doubt  be,  that  he  had  embraced 
the  religion  of  her  whom  he  had  chosen 
for  a  wife.  Still  there  is  evidently  no 
certainty  in  the  intimation, and  we  must 
take  it  lor  what  it  is  worth.  It  is  im. 
possible  to  feel  much  respect  for  the 
judgment  of  men  who  are  constantly 
prone  to  give  a  tongue  to  the  silence  of 
scripture,  and  supply  its  omissions  with 
the  extravagant  and  silly  fictions  of 
their  own  teeming  fancies  j  a  specimen 


246 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


11  And  the  Israelitish  woman's 
son  h  blasphemed  the  name  of  the 
LORDy   and  i  cursed ;    and   they 

5,  11,  2-2,  and  2.  5,  9, 


h  ver.  16.     i  Job 
10.     Isai.  S.  21. 


of  wliich  is  to  be  seen  in  the  asserted 
genealogy  which  they  have  ascribed  to 
this  son  of  Shelomiih,  making  his  father 
to  be  no  other  than  the  nran  whom 
Moses  killed  in  Egypt.  But  we  know 
nothing  more,  for  we  are  told  nothing 
more,  respecting  this  bold  transgressor, 
than  that  he  was  now  enumerated  in  the 
congregation  of  Israel,  and  that  he  was 
guilty  of  the  high-handed  crime  here 
recited.  As  to  the  *  going  out'  spoken 
of  in  the  text,  it  is  not  clear  what  is  to 
be  understood  by  the  expression  ;  whe- 
ther it  refers  to  his  coming  out  of  Egypt, 
or  simply  to  his  going  out  of  his  tent, 
and  engaging  in  strife  abroad.  We  in- 
cline to  the  former  opinion. 

\\.  And  the  Israelitish  woman's  son 
blasphemed  the  name  of  the  Lord,  and 
cursed.  Heb.  p>pii  crn  Ti^  Dpi 
yikkob  eth  hashshem  va-yekalUl,  blas' 
phemcd  the  name,  and  cursed.  The 
words,  '  of  the  Lord,'  it  will  be  per- 
ceived, are  supplied,  not  being  found  in 
the  original.  Nor  does  any  one  of  the 
ancient  versions,  the  Chal.,  the  Sam., 
the  Syr.,  the  Arab.,  the  Sept.,  or  the 
Vulg.,  attempt  to  supply  the  sacred 
name.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  however, 
that  the  words  are  properly  supplied, 
and  that  his  crime  was  a  bold  and  im- 
pious profaning  the  august  name  of 
Jehovah,  which  name  is  perhaps  omit- 
ted by  the  writer  in  order  to  evince  a 
reverence  strikingly  in  contrast  with 
the  daring  hardihood  of  the  offender. 
The  original  word  Zp"^  yikkob,  from 
^pD  ncikab,  to  pierce,  bore,  or  strike 
through,  is  probably  used  in  this  con- 
nexion to  imply  that  blasphemy  is  a 
kind  of  striking  through  or  wounding 
with  the  tongue,  as  it  is  said  in  Pro- 
verbs,  '  There  is  that  speaketh  the 
piercings  of  a  suord.'  It  is  elsewhere 
used  in  the  same  sense,  as  Num.  23. 13, 


k brought  him  unto  Moses:  (and 
his  mother's  name  was  Shelomiih, 
the  daughter  of  Dibri,  of  the  tribe 
of  Dan :) 

k  Exod.  18.  22.  26. 


25,  Job.  3.  8, — 5. 3.  So,  also,  the  Arabic 
renders  it  by  a  word  signifying  prima- 
rily to  cut  OT  peif orate,  and  thence  used 
figuratively  for  cursing  or  malediction. 
Yet  it  is  certain  that  the  Hebrew  term 
is  employed  by  way  of  secondary  usage 
in  the  sense  of  declaring  or  expressing 
distinctly,  specifying,  calling  by  name, 
as  Gen.  30.  28,  Num.  1 .  17,  Is.  62.  3,  and 
hence,  the  Jews,  from  a  very  early  pe- 
riod, considered  themselves  as  prohibit- 
ed from  uttering  the  name  '  Jehovah,' 
except  on  the  most  sacred  occasions,  as 
it  is  well  known  that  in  reading  their 
Scriptures  they  universally  substituted 
'^DHi^  adonai,  Lord,  for  nin*^  Yehovah, 
wherever  it  occurs,  and  in  their  writings 
employ  fim  hashshem,  the  name,  the 
very  word  in  the  passage  before  us.  It 
is  also  to  be  remarked,  that  the  Gr.  has 
cTTovonaffas  to  ovo^a,  having  named  the 
name,  while  Onkelos  and  the  Syriac 
ha\e,  distinctly  expressed,  and  the  Arab, 
of  Erpenius,  pronounced.  The  proba- 
bility, we  think  is,  that  this  idea  is  act- 
ually included  in  the  meaning  of  the 
term  ;  that  there  was  a  distinct  and  at 
the  same  time  opprobrious  and  profane 
utterance  of  that  name  which  is  above 
every  name,  the  holy  designation  of  the 
infinite  and  eternal  God,  which  ought 
never  to  be  uttered  without  a  trembling 
awe  upon  the  spirit.  Houbigant,  indeed, 
and  some  others,  suppose  that  the  blas- 
phemer did  not  use  the  name  of  the 
true  God  at  all,  but  had  been  swearing 
by  one  of  the  gods  of  his  country,  and 
that  his  crime  was  mentioning  the 
name  of  a  strange  god  in  the  camp  of 
Israel.  But  upon  reference  to  the  law, 
enacted  v.  16,  there  seems  no  good  rea- 
son to  consider  this  a  sound  interpreta- 
tion ;  for  we  find  that  CTL'tl  hashshem,  the 
name,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  verse 
answers  to  nin*^  w"^   slum   Tehovah, 


B.  C.  1490.3 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 


247 


12  And  they  iput  him  inward, 
mthat  ihe  rai'ndof  the  Lord  might 
be  shewed  them. 

13  And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  saying, 


1  Numb.  15.  34. 
27,  5,  and  36.  5,  ( 


m  Exod.  18.  15,  IG.   Num. 


th4:  name  of  Jehovah,  ia  the  former 
part.  The  Jews  also  frequently  use 
cm  haskshtm,  for  Jehovah  ;  and  that 
it  was  an  ancient  custom  thus  to  al- 
lude to  the  Deity,  without  mentioning 
his  name,  appears  from  inscriptions 
among  the  Palmyrenians,  on  whose 
marbles  we  find,  *  To  the  blessed  name 

be  fear  for  ever to  the  blessed  name, 

for  ever  good,  and  merciful,  be  fear 

to  the  blessed  name  for  ever  be  fear,' 
&c. IT  And  cursed.  It  is  not  un- 
likely that  being  arraigned  bf^fore  the 
magistrates,  and  sentence  being  given 
against  him,  he  in  a  fit  of  exasperation 
spoke  blasphemous  words  against  God, 
renouncing  his  worship,  and  cursing  the 

judges  who  had   condemned  him. 

^  And  they  brought  him  unto  Moses, 
&c.  The  case  was  new  and  unprece- 
dented, and  as  there  was  no  law  by 
which  the  amount  of  guilt  could  be  de- 
termined, nor,  consequently,  the  de- 
gree of  punishment,  it  was  necessary 
to  consult  the  Great  Lawgiver  on  the 
occasion.  liloses,  no  doubt,  had  re- 
course to  the  tabernacle,  and  received 
the  directions  afterwards  mentioned, 
from  the  Shekinah  dwelling  between 
the  cherubim.  The  answer  was  proba- 
bly by  the  Urim  and  Thummim. 

12.  And  they  put  him  in  u-ard,  that 
the  mind  of  the  Lord  might  be  shewed 
them.  Chal.  *  Until  it  was  expounded 
unto  them  by  the  decree  of  the  Word 
of  the  Lord.'  Gr.  huKpivai  avrov  6ia 
Trpnarayixaroi    KvplJV,    tO  judge   him    by 

the  commandment  of  the  Lord.  Im- 
prisonment is  no  where  mentioned  in 
the  books  of  Moses,  or  in  the  early  his- 
torical books,  as  a  punishment,  but 
only  as  a  means  of  keeping  a  criminal 
ill  safe  custody  till  the  time  of  trial. 


14  Bring  forth  him  that  hath 
cursed  without  the  camp  ;  and  let 
all  that  heard  him  « lay  their  hands 
upon  his  head,  and  let  all  the  con- 
gregation stone  him. 

n  Deut,  13.  9,  and  17.  7. 

As  a  precedent  was  now  to  be  set  for 
future  ages,  it  became  them  to  proceed 
with  due  deliberation. 

14.  Bring  forth  him  that  hath  cursed 
without  the  camp.  As  the  camp  of 
Israel  was  holy,  the  execution  of  one 
who  had  rendered  himself  so  abomina- 
ble and  accursed  would  bring  a  defile- 
ment upon  it  which  was  not  to  be  tol- 
erated.  IT  Lay  their  hands  upon  his 

head.  By  this  testimony  the  people 
who  heard  him  curse  bore  their  public 
testimony  in  order  to  his  being  fully 
convicted ;  and  it  was  moreover  a  sig- 
nificant mode  of  saying  to  the  man, 
'  Thy  blood  be  upon  thine  own  head  ; 
we  hereby  clear  ourselves  of  all  partici- 
pation in  thy  guilt.'  We  find  no  other 
instance  of  this  ceremony  of  the  impo- 
sition of  hands  in  the  case  of  a  con- 
demned malefactor,  and  the  Jews  hold 
it  to  be  peculiar  to  the  sin  of  blasphemy. 
'  Of  all  that  are  killed,'  says  Maimoni- 
des,  *  by  the  Sanhedrin,  there  is  none 
upon  whom  they  impose  hands  save  the 
blasphemer  only.'  These  remarks  will 
be  found  to  illustrate  the  account  given 
in  the  New  Testament  of  the  deaths  of 
our  Lord  and  of  St.  Stephen,  who  were 
both  murdered  under  a  false  charge  of 
blasphemy.  The  crime  of  the  judges 
and  witnesses  in  these  cases  was  in  de- 
claring them  guilty  of  blasphemy,  not 
in  pronouncing  blasphemy  to  deserve 
death.  The  criminal  codes  of  most 
Christian  countries  have  denounced 
death  as  the  ultimate  punishment  of 
blasphemy,  in  imitation  of  the  law  in 
this  chapter  :  but  these  codes  dilTer 
very  much  in  the  definition  of  blas- 
phemy ;  and  it  is  perhaps  owing  to  this 
that  the  capital  penalty  is  at  present 
nowhere  enforced  even  where  it  retains 


248 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1490. 


15  And  thou  shall  speak  unto  the 
children  of  Israel,  saying,  Whoso- 
ever curseth  his  God  o  shall  bear 
his  sin. 

16  And  he  that  pblasphemeth  the 
name  of  the  Lord,  he  shall  surely 
be  put  to  death,  and  all  the  con- 
gregation shall  certainly  stone  him : 

o  ch.  5.  1,  and  20.  17.  Numb.  9.  13. 
P  1  Kings  21.  10,  13.  Ps.  74.  10,  18.  Matt. 
12.31.     Marks.  28,     Jam.  2.  7. 

its  place  in  the  statute-books.  In  esti- 
mating the  enormity  of  the  offence,  we 
must  not  overlook  the  circumstance 
of  aggravation,  that  the  act  of  blas- 
phemy against  Jehovah  was  both  a  re- 
ligious and  political  crime,  he  being 
not  only  the  God,  but  the  king  of  the 
Hebrew  nation. 

15.  And  thou  shalt  speak,  &c.  The 
present  transaction,  as  might  be  ex- 
pected, gave  rise  to  a  standing  law  on 
the  subject.  Whoever  spake  disre- 
spectfully or  reproachingly  of  God,  un- 
der any  of  his  titles,  was  to  be  put  to 
death. 

16-  He  that  blasphemeth  the  name  of 
the  Lord,  &c.  Heb.  nm'^  'D:^  np]  no- 
ktb  sh'tm  Yehovah,  the  blasphemer  of  the 
name  of  Jehovah.  Chal.  '  He  that  ex- 
presseth.'  Gr.  ovojxai^div  to  ovDfxa  Kvpiov, 
he  that  nameth  the  name  of  the  Lord. 
The  original  is  the  same  word  that  oc- 
curs V.  11,  and  here,  as  there,  implies  a 
blasphemous,  distinct  uttering.  Whe- 
ther the  clause  is  intended  to  express  a 
higher  degree  of  the  sin  mentioned  in 
the  preceding  verse,  or  whether  it  is 
only  a  repetition  of  the  same  sentence, 
with  a  more  express  designation  of  the 
punishment,  is  uncertam.  The  Jews, 
for  the  most  part,  understand  it  of  him 
only  who  expressed  the  7j<ime,  i.  e.  the 
most  holy  name  of  God,  or  Jehovah,  as 
the  Targ.  Jerus.  says,  on  Deut.  32., 
'  Woe  unto  those  that  in  their  execra- 
tions use  the  holy  name,  which  it  is  not 
lawful  for  the  highest  angel  to  express.' 
But  Maimonides  says,  '  There  be  some 
that  expound  it,  tliat  he  is  not  guilty  of 


as  well  the  stranger,  as  he  that  is 
born  in  the  land,  when  he  blas- 
phemeth the  name  of  the  LORDy 
shall  be  put  to  death. 

17  II  q  And  he  that  killeth  any 
man  shall  surely  be  put  to  death. 

18  rAnd  he  that  killeth  a  beast 
shall  make  it  good ;  beast  for  beast. 

19  And  if  a  man  cause  a  blemish 

q  Eiod.  21.  12.    Numb.  35.  31.    Deut.  19. 
11,  12.     r  ver.  21. 

death  save  for  the  name  '  Jehovah.' 
Yet  I  say,  for  '  Adonai '  also  he  is  to  be 
stoned.'  It  was  from  this  passage  es- 
pecially that  the  rabbinical  restraint 
arose  as  to  uttering  the  name  '  Jeho- 
vah,' either  in  reading  the  Scriptures  or 
otherwise,  except  in  the  sanctuary, 
when  the  priest  blessed  the  people,  ac- 
cording to  the  law,  Num.  6.  23-27.  And 
so  long  was  this  practice  in  vogue 
among  them  that  the  true  pronunciation 
of  the  word  has  become  lost ;  the  cur- 
rent pronunciation  depending  upon  vow- 
els that  do  not  belong  to  it.  But  there 
is  no  question  that  this  is  merely  a  su- 
perstitious scruple,  for  which  nothing 
more  than  a  forced  traditionary  inter- 
pretation can  be  pleaded. 

The  Law  of  Murder. 
17.  He  that  killeth  any  man.  Heb. 
tnj<  rSD  ^S  n^"'  yakkeh  kol  nephesh 
ddCim,  that  smiteth  the  life,  or  soul,  of 
a  man.  As  this  statute  has  been  before 
explained,  Ex.21.  12,  the  only  question 
here,  is  respecting  the  reasons  of  its  in- 
sertion in  this  connexion.  The  true  an 
swer  is  perhaps  to  be  gathered  from  the 
context.  The  subsequent  verses  evince 
that  both  native-born  Israelites  and 
sojourning  proselytes  were  to  be  sub- 
ject to  the  same  penal  laws.  Inas- 
much, then, as  a  stranger  was  to  be  put 
to  death  for  killing  a  man,  let  no  one 
deem  it  hard  that  he  should  be  punish- 
ed for  blasphemy  with  equal  severity 
with  the  son  of  Israel.  It  seems  to  be 
introduced  by  way  of  obviating  a  query 
that  might  arise  as  to  punishing  bias- 


B.  C.  1490.] 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 


249 


in  his  neighbour ;  as  s  he  hath  d-one, 
so  shall  it  be  done  unto  him  : 

20  Breach  for  breach,  eye  for  eye, 
tooth  for  tooth:  as  he  hatJi  caused 
a  blemish  in  a  man,  so  shall  it  be 
done  to  him  again. 

21  tAnd  he  that  killeth  a  beast, 
he  shall  restore  it:  "and  he  that 
killeth  a  man,  he  shall  be  put  to 
death. 

s  Exod.  21.  24.  Deut.  19.  21.  Matt.  5.  39, 
and  7.  2.    t  Exod.  21.  33.    ver.  IS.     "  ver.  17. 


I  22  Ye  shall  have  '^  one  manner  of 
j  law,  as  well  for  the  stranger,  as 
j  for  one  of  your  own  country  :  for  I 
I  am  the  Lord  your  God. 

23  ^  And  Moses  spake  to  the 
children  of  Israel,  y  that  they  should 
bring  forth  him  that  had  cursed  out 
of  the  camp,  and  stone  him  with 
stones:  and  the  children  of  Israel 
did  as  the  Lord  commanded  Moses. 

X  Exod.  12.  49.  ch.  19.  34.  Xumb.  15.  16. 
y  ver.  14. 


phemy  in  a  foreigner,  in  so  exemplary 
II  manner. 

As  to  the  remaining  precepts  in  this 
chapter,  the  marginal  references  will 
point  to  the  places  where  they  are  mi- 
nutely explained. 

Remarks. — (10-16.)  The  prominent 
reflection  suggested  by  the  present  nar- 
rative is,  the  greatness  and  grievous- 
ness  of  the  sin  of  blasphemy.  If  we 
are  assured  that  for  every  idle  word 
which  men  shall  speak  they  shall  give 
an  account  thereof  in  the  day  of  judg- 
ment, how  much  more  for  every  profane 
and  impious  one  !  If  even  neglect  of 
God  be  a  high  offence  against  him,  in 
whom  we  live,  and  move,  and  have  our 
being,  and  who  has  given  his  son  to  die 
for  our  sins,  how  much  deeper  in  enor- 
mity and  blacker  in  dye  must  be  such 
contempt  and  defiance  of  his  majesty  ! 
How  fearful  to  give  way  to  the  evil  pas- 
sions which  prompt  the  lips  to  break 
forth  in  irreverent  and  blasphemous  ex- 
clamations !  Although  the  man  who  is 
guilty  of  this  iniquity  may  not  now 
come  under  an  express  statute  that  con- 
demns him  to  death,  yet  let  him  not 
forget  that  there  is  an  ear  which  hears, 
and  a  book  of  remembrance  that  con- 
tains all  his  *  ungodly  speeches,'  and 
will  assuredly  mete  out  to  him  the 
due  reward  of  his  guilt. 

It  is  moreover  to  be  remembered  that 
blasphemy  is  not  confined  to  the  mere 
profane  use  of  the  name  or  titles  of  the 
Most  High.     Any  kind  of  disparaging  ' 


or  contemptuous  reflections  thrown  out 
against  the  power  or  grace  of  God 
comes  into  the  same  category  in  the 
estimation  of  the  Scriptures.  Thus 
Rabshakeh  is  charged  with  blasphemy 
for  asserting  that  the  God  of  Israel  had 
no  more  power  than  the  gods  of  the 
heathen.  And  thus  the  Psalmist  pleads, 
'  0  God,  how  long  shall  the  adversary 
reproach,  shall  the  many  blaspheme  thy 
name  for  ever?'  Thus,  moreover,  Paul 
says  of  himself  that  he  was  before  his 
conversion  a  blasphemer,  because  he 
had  spoken  against  and  opposed  the 
grace  of  Christ  ;  and  doubtless  it  is  for 
the  same  reason  that  James  says  of  the 
rich  men  of  his  day, '  Do  they  not  blas- 
pheme that  worthy  name  by  which  ye 
are  called?'  And  while  opposition  to 
Christ  is  thus  looked  upon  in  Scripture, 
how  dreadful  is  the  denunciation  against 
this  sin  w^hen  committed  against  the 
Holy  Ghost.  From  all  this  we  cannot 
but  be  reminded  how  careful  it  behoves 
us  to  he  not  to  reproach  the  Lord  in  his 
word,  or  works,  or  ways  ;  not  to  object 
against  the  Gospel,  or  to  endeavor  to 
hinder  its  progress,  and  not  to  detract 
from  those  glorious  operations  of  power 
or  grace  wrought  by  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
the  souls  of  men,  lest  we  incur  the  guilt 
of  this  fearful  sin. 

And  lastly,  let  us  beware  of  causing 
others  to  blaspheme.  We  may  lead 
men  to  curse  by  irritating  their  passions, 
and  we  may  cause  them  to  speak  evil 
of  the  Lord  by  the  commission  of  sins 
which  shall  bring  discredit  upon  reli? 


250 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1491. 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses in  Mount  Sinai,  saying, 
2  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  them,  When  ye 


I  come  into  the  land  which  I  give 
I  you,  then  shall  the  land  keep  a  a 
sabbath  unto  the  Lord. 


gion.  See  a  melancholy  instance  of  this 
ill  the  history  of  David,  and  the  heavy 
charge  brought  against  him  on  this  very 
account  ;  '  Because  by  this  deed  thou 
hast  given  great  occasion  to  the  ene- 
mies of  the  Lord  to  blaspheme.'  Hear 
the  strong  reproof  of  the  apostle  Paul 
to  the  Jews  who  lived  not  according  to 
the  principles  and  precepts  of  their  law, 
'  The  name  of  God,'  says  he,  '  is  bias- 
phemed  among  the  Gentiles  through 
you.'  And  alas,  it  is  chargeable  upon 
many  nominal  Christians,  to  their  great 
reproach  and  shame,  that  while  residing 
in  foreign  lands  among  heathens,  Ma- 
hometans, and  other  rejecters  of  the  Gos- 
pel, they  live  in  a  manner  so  negligent 
of  religion,  and  so  dissolute  as  to  bring 
the  greatest  disgrace  upon  the  sacred 
cause  of  Christianity.  The  same  effects 
may  be  produced  by  those  who  live  at 
home.  It  is  to  be  feared  that  many  a  one 
has  been  encouraged  in  sin,  hardened  in 
lieart,  and  driven  to  the  grossest  enor- 
mities in  profane  swearing  and  cursing, 
and  every  breach  of  the  divine  law,  by 
the  irreligious  and  immoral  lives  of 
persons,  and  by  the  scoffing  and  con- 
temptuous speech  of  those  professing 
the  religion  of  Christ.  God  forbid  that 
we  should  thus  dishonor  the  truth,  and 
ruin  our  souls  ! 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

The  Law  of  the  Sabbatical  Year. 
1.  And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses  in 
Mount  Sinai.  That  is,  in  the  wilder- 
ness or  region  of  Sinai,  in  the  vicinity 
of  the  mount,  where  the  people  were 
now  encamped.  '  Mount '  is  often  used 
in  the  Scriptures  for  '  mountainous  re- 
gion.' The  congregation  remained  for 
!i  year  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  hal- 


a  Exod.  23. 10. 
3.21. 


See  ch.  26.  Si,  35.   2  Chron. 


lowed  mount,  from  whence  they  did  not 
remove  till  the  twentieth  day  of  the 
second  month  of  the  second  year  after 
their  coming  out  of  Egypt,  Num.  10. 
11,  V2.  All  that  is  here  related  was 
undoubtedly  delivered  to  Moses  in  the 
first  month  of  the  second  year  after  the 
exodus,  immediately  subsequent  to  the 
setting  up  of  the  tabernacle,  Ex.  40.  17, 
2.  Then  shall  the  land  keep  a  sabbath 
unto  the  Lord.  Heb.  Ti'IJ  y\i<  nrOlD 
rrri"'^  shabethah  eretz  shabbCith  laiho- 
tah,  shall  the  land  sabbatize  a  sabbath 
unto  the  Lord.  Gr.  ava-rravcErai  {)  yn, 
the  land  shall  rest.  Chal.  '  The  land 
shall  be  remitted  a  remission,'  which, 
though  a  barbarism  in  our  language, 
still  conveys  an  intelligible  idea.  Tins 
year  of  rest  to  the  land  is  a  very  promi- 
nent feature  of  the  sabbatic  system, 
which  formed  so  prominent  and  distin- 
guishing a  part  of  the  Hebrew  polity. 
As  man  was  commanded  and  privileged 
on  the  seventh  day  to  abstain  from  that 
labor  to  which  he  had  subjected  himself 
by  sin,  so,  on  the  seventh  year,  the 
earth  was  also  to  rest,  and  enjoy,  as  it 
were,  a  respite  from  the  effects  of  the 
curse.  The  prominent  circumstances 
which  distinguished  the  sabbatical  year 
from  common  years  may  be  thus  enu- 
merated. (1.)  All  agricultural  opera- 
tions were  to  be  suspended,  and  the 
land  was  to  lie  fallow.  The  whole 
country  must,  in  fact,  have  been  thrown 
into  one  vast  common,  free  to  the  poor 
and  the  stranger,  to  the  domestic  cattle 
and  the  game  ;  for  the  proprietor  of  the 
land  not  only  ceased  to  cultivate  it,  but 
had  no  exclusive  right  to  its  spontane- 
ous produce,  although  he  might  share 
in  it.  (2.)  The  produce  of  every  sixth 
year  was  promised  to  be  such  as  would 
support   them    till    the   harvest   of  the 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXV 


251 


H  Six  years  ihou  shalt  sow  thy 
field,  and  six  years  ihou  siiall  prune 
thy  vineyard,  and  gather  in  the 
fruit  thereof; 

t-iiith  year  ;  a  circuiuslancc  which 
would  clearly  demonstrate  a  particular 
providence  in  respect  to  the  institution. 
(3.)  It  was  a  season  of  release  Irom 
debts  due  from  one  Israelite  to  another  ; 
but  not  those  due  from  foreigners  to 
Israelites.  (4.)  Every  Hebrew  slave 
had  the  option  of  being  released  this 
year  from  liis  servitude.  At  least  this 
is  often  inferred  from  Ex.  21.  2  ;  but 
it  will  be  seen  by  reference  to  the  Note 
on  that  passage  to  be  quite  doubtlul 
whether  the  seventh  year  there  men-  I 
tioned  was  not  the  seventh  year  of  his 
actual  servic'!,  rather  than  the  sabbat- 
ical year.  (5.)  In  the  sabbatical  year, 
at  the  feast  of  tabernacles,  they  were 
enjoined  to  read  the  law  in  the  hearing 
of  all  the  people.  This  was  called  by 
llie  Rabbinical  writers  '  the  reading  of 
the  king,'  because  tradition  made  the 
king  himself  the  reader  on  this  occasion. 
It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  this  year 
of  rest  to  the  land  was  necessarily 
spent  by  the  Hebrews  in  idleness. 
They  could  ti^h,  hunt,  take  care  of  their 
bees  and  flocks,  repair  their  buildings 
and  furniture,  manufacture  clothes,  and 
carry  on  their  usual  traffic. 

In  adverting  to  tlie  various  political 
and  moral  designs  of  this  institution, 
we  may  observe,  in  the  first  place,  that 
the  l.iiid  itself  would  experience  the 
happy  effects  of  lying  fallow  one  year, 
in  itself.  Incessant  culture  tends  to  ex- 
haust the  strength  of  the  soil,  although 
this  is  in  great  measure  counteracted  in 
modern  times  by  the  expedient  of  a 
rotation  of  crops.  But  there  is  no  doubt 
that  among  the  Israelites  the  land  re- 
maining one  year  untilled,  would  re- 
cruit itself  for  a  more  vigorous  fertility 
afterwards.  Again,  the  institution  was 
calculated  to  remind  the  chosen  people 
that  God  was  the  great  Proprietor  of  all, 
and  that  the  v  were  mere  tenants,  holding 


4  But  in  the  seventh  year  shall 
be  a  sabbath  of  rest  unto  the  land, 
a  sabbath  for  the  Lord:  thou  shalt 


their  earthly  possessions  upon  certain 
prescribed  conditions,  with  which  they 
could     not   safely    dispense.      Closely 
connected    with   this,  was  the  influence 
wliich  the  Sabbatic  year  would  have  in 
cherishing   appropriate    sentiments  of 
piety,  and   leading  them  to  a  practical 
trust     in     au    overruling    providence. 
When    they   saw  the  Sabbatic  year  at 
hand,   how  forcibly  would  they  be  im- 
pressed with   the   goodness  of  God  in 
making  provision  for  it  !     They  would 
have  three  years  to  live  on  the  produce 
of  one    single  year.     And   when   they 
beheld  their  barns  overflowing  with  the 
produce  of  the  earth,  and  their  presses 
bursting  out  with  new  wine,  could  they 
refrain  from  saying,   '  This  is  the  hand 
of  the  Lord  ;  how  can  we  but  feel  deep- 
ly sensible  to  his  love  and   kindness  ? 
How  can  we  refuse  to  love,  serve,  and 
trust  forever  so  gracious  a  benefactor?  ' 
The  observance  of  this  season  was,  ia 
fact,  a  test  of  their  belief  in  the  imme- 
diate superintendiug  providence  of  God, 
and  grieved  we  are   to  be   obliged  to 
say,  that  under  this  lest  the  Israelites 
failed  ;    and   their    failure   was    a  na- 
tional   sin,  which    constituted   one  of 
the    grand   procuring   causes   of   their 
subsequent  long  captivity  in  Babylon. 
This  fact  seems  to  be  anticipated,  Lev. 
26.  33-35,  as  not  unlikely  to  happen, 
and  when  the  captivity  actually  came, 
the  years  of  its  continuance  correspond- 
ed with  the  number  of  the  neglected 
sabbatic  years ;  and  as  these  were  sev- 
enty, this  would  carry  us  back  about  500 
years    to    the    commencement   of   the 
kingly  government,  as  the  time  at  which 
the  observance  was  discontinued.   After 
I  the  captivity  it  was  more  scrupulously 
observed. 

4.  A  sabbath  of  rest  unto  the  land. 
Heb.  "^ir^tU  T-'itJ  shabbath  shabbathorif 
a  sabbath  of  sabbatism  ;    a  phrase  of 


252 


LEVITICUS. 


fB.  C.  1491. 


neither  sow  thy  field,  nor  prune 
thy  vineyard. 

5  bTh'ai  which  groweth  of  its 
own  accord  of  thy  harvest,  thou 
shall  not  reap,  neither  gather  the 
grapes  of  thy  vine  undressed  :  for 
it  is  a  year  of  rest  unto  the  land. 

6  And  the  sabbath  of  the  land 
shall  be  meat  for  you;  for  thee, 
and  for  tiiy  servant,  and  for  thy 

»>  2  Kings  19.  29. 

great  intensity  of  innport,  which  we 
have  previously  explained.  In  its  typi- 
cal scope  the  ordinance  no  doubt  pointed 
forward  to  the  great  sabbatical  period 
of  the  world,  which  according  to  a  very 
ancient  Jewish  tradition,  is  to  succeed 
the  previous  six  thousand  years.  These, 
according  to  the  Rabbins,  are  distributed 
as  follows  ; — Two  thousand  before  the 
law  ;  two  thousand  under  the  law  j  and 
two  thousand  under  the  Messiah.  Then 
comes   the   grand  period  of  bliss  and 

glory   to  the  world. IT  Thou  shall 

neither  sow  thy  field  nor  prune  thy 
vineyard.  That  is,  the  superfluous 
shoots  and  branches  which  the  husband- 
man cuts  to  make  the  trees  more  fruitful. 
5.  Neither  gather  the  grapes  of  thy 
vine  undressed.  Heb.  '1'T'T]  ^^j5>  in- 
neb'e  nezir'ika,  the  grapes  of  thy  separa- 
tion. Gr.  rrjv  aTa<pv\r]v  tov  ayiacnaroi  aov, 
the  grapes  of  the  sanctification.  Chal. 
*  the  vine  of  thy  leaving  ;'  i.  c.  which 
thou  art  to  leave  uncultivated.'  The 
original  word  ^"T^tD  nezir'ika,  is  de- 
rived from  ^13  nazar,  to  separate,  from 
which  comes  '  Nazarite,'  one  separated, 
one  devoted  to  God  for  a  season  by  spe- 
cial consecration.  One  requisite  in  this 
case,  was  that  the  hair  should  be  suf- 
fered to  grow  without  being  shaven  ; 
and  in  like  manner  the  vineyard  of  the 
Israelites  being  in  a  sense  consecrated 
to  God  for  the  space  of  the  sabbatical 
year,  it  was  to  be  left  in  the  condition 
of  the  Nazarite's  head,  untouched  by 
^nife  or  pruning-hook.  This  is  the  rea- 
son of  its  being  rendered  in  our  transla- 
tion *  undreseed.' 


maid,  and  for  thy  hired  servant, 
and  for  thy  stranger  that  sojourn- 
eth  with  thee, 

7  And  for  thy  cattle,  and  for  the 
beast  that  are  in  thy  land,  shall  all 
the  increase  thereof  be  meat. 

8  H  And  thou  shalt  number  seven 
sabbaths  of  years  unto  thee,  seven 
times  seven  years  ;  and  the  space 
of  the  seven  sabbaths  of  years  shall 
be  unto  thee  forty  and  nine  years. 


6.  The  sabbath  of  the  land  shall  be 
meat  for  you.  '  Sabbath  of  the  land  ' 
is  here  used  by  a  figure  of  speech  for  the 
fruit  of  the  sabbath,  i.  e.  of  the  sabbat- 
ical year.  In  like  manner  the  word 
'sabbaths'  is  used  ch.  23.  38,  for  the 
sacrifices  of  the  sabbath.  It  would 
seem  from  this  that  the  prohibition  of 
gathering  corn  and  fruits  in  this  year 
was  not  absolute,  for  the  products  of 
the  vine  and  olive,  and  the  milk  and 
honey  would  continue  as  usual. 

The  Jubilee. 

8.  Thou  shalt  number  seven  sabbaths 
of  years.  The  term  '  sabbath '  here  is 
used  in  the  sense  of  *  week,'  as  before 
explained,  so  that  as  a  literal  week 
consisted  of  seven  days,  a  sabbath  of 
weeks  consisted  of  seven  years.  It  is 
not,  however,  to  be  understood  that  the 
jubilee  was  to  be  celebrated  on  the 
forty-ninth,  but  on  the  fiftieth  year, 
as  is  evident  from  v.  11.  The  forty- 
ninth  was  the  ordinary  seventh  or  sab- 
batical year,  so  that,  in  fact,  two  holy 
years  came  together.  Thus  writes 
Maimonides  :  '  The  year  of  jubilee 
Cometh  not  into  the  count  of  the  years 
of  the  seven  ;  but  the  nine  and  fortieth 
year  is  the  release,  and  the  fiftieth  year 
the  jubilee.'  The  jubilee,  therefore, 
was  proclaimed  on  the  forty-ninth  and 
celebrated  on  the  fiftieth  year. 

The  institution  here  described  is  one 
of  the  most  interesting  and  important 
of  all  the  appointments  which  charac- 
terized the  Jewish  economy.  It  com- 
menced on  the  first  day  of  the  month 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXV. 


253 


Tisri,  that  is,  the  civil  new  year's  day. 
lis  distinguishing  features  were  the  fol- 
lowing -. — 

(1.)  As  in  the  sabbatical  year,  so  in 
liiis,  the  people  wore  neither  to  sow  nor 
to  Ff-ap,  and  the  spontaneous  products 
ol  the  earth  were  to  be  accounted  com- 
mon property.  Tlius  there  were  two 
years  at  every  jubilee,  when  the  Jews 
ii'-iilier  sowed  nor  reaped  ;  nanielj',  the 
jubilee  and  the  year  before,  which  was 
always  a  sabbatical  year;  and  hence 
we  see  the  reason  why  the  promise  of 
support,  given  in  Lev.  25.  20-22,  was 
from  the  sixth  till  the  harvest  of  the 
ninth  year.  We  have  only  two  pas- 
sages of  Scripture  where  this  promise 
is  alluded  to,  viz.,  2  Kings  19.  29,  and 
Is.  37.  30. 

(2.)  The  second  thing  remarkable  in 
the  year  of  jubilee  was,  that  all  the 
lands  which  had  been  sold  by  one  He- 
brew to  another,  had  a  reference  to  this, 
being  valued  according  to  its  proximity 
or  remoteness,  in  order  to  their  being 
restored  in  that  year  ;  or  might  be  re- 
deemed sooner  by  giving  to  the  owner 
a  proper  compensation. 

(3.)  All  sales  of  houses  in  the  coun- 
try, were  returned  likewise  at  that  time, 
or  could  have  been  redeemed  sooner ; 
but  all  dwelling  houses  in  walled  cities, 
\niless  redeemed  within  a  year,  re- 
mained for  ever  with  the  possessor,  ex- 
cept in  the  case  of  houses  belonging  to 
the  Levites,  which  might  have  been 
redeemed  at  any  time,  although  in  wall- 
ed cities;  and  if  not  redeemed,  returned 
to  them  again  as  a  matter  of  course  in 
the  year  of  jubilee. 

(4.)  All  Israelites  who  on  account  of 
poverty  had  sold  themselves,  that  is  to 
say  their  services,  to  Israelites,  were 
not  to  be  reckoned  as  bond,  but  as  hired 
servants,  and  were  to  return  unto  their 
families  and  fathers'  possessions  in  the 
year  of  jubilee. 

(5.)  All  poor  Israelites  who  on  ac- 
comit  of  poverty  had  sold  themselves  to 
proselytes,  were  to  be  accounted  hired 
servants,  and  might  be  redeemed  at  any 


lime  by  their  relatives  or  themselves  ; 
but,  if  not  redeemed,  were  to  obtaiu 
their  liberty  at  the  jubilee. 

(6.)  As  the  Jewish  kings  had  com- 
monly much  in  their  power,  they  were 
expressly  forbidden,  on  the  one  hand, 
to  seize  the  possession  of  any  Israelite 
as  a  provision  for  their  family,  or  on 
the  other  to  squander  the  royal  domains 
on  favorites,  as  that  would  liave  lessen- 
ed the  patrimony  of  the  crown  ;  and  if 
any  such  grants  were  at  any  time  made, 
they  reverted,  of  course,  to  the  original 
proprietors  in  the  year  of  jubilee. 

Such  was  the  nature  of  the  Jewish 
jubilee  ;  but  we  do  not  find  that  any 
particular  sacrifices  were  appointed, 
nor  even  that  reading  of  the  law  which 
was  enjoined  in  the  sabbatical  year  ; 
neither  is  it  clear  at  what  hour  of  the 
day  of  annual  expiation  the  silver  trum- 
pets sounded  to  announce  its  commence- 
ment. It  is  probable,  however,  that  it 
was  in  the  evening,  after  the  high  priest 
had  entered  the  most  holy  place,  the 
scape  goat  had  been  sent  into  the  wil- 
derness, and  the  people,  in  full  concert 
in  the  temple,  had  been  praising  the 
Lord  for  his  goodness,  and  because  his 
mercy  endureth  for  ever.  Imagination 
may  conceive,  but  it  is  beyond  the 
power  of  language  to  describe,  the  gen- 
eral burst  of  joy  that  would  pervade  the 
land,  when  the  poor  Israelites  tasted 
aga"in  the  sweets  of  liberty,  and  returned 
to  their  possessions,  their  families,  and 
friends.  In  vain  would  sleep  invite 
them  to  repose — their  hearts  would  be 
too  full  to  feel  the  lassitude  of  nature  ; 
and  the  night  would  be  spent  in  grati- 
tude and  praise.  What  a  lively  em- 
blem of  the  gospel  of  Christ  !  which  is 
peculiarly  addressed  to  the  poor,  which 
is  fitted  to  heal  the  broken  hearted,  to 
give  deliverance  to  the  captives,  the 
opening  of  the  prison  doors  to  them 
that  are  bound,  and  to  preach  unto  all 
the  acceptable  year  of  the  Lord. 

The  true  origin  of  the  term  '  Jubilee ' 
is  somewhat  doubtful.  We  trace  it  in- 
deed to  the  Heb.  '^2']"^  yobi'l,  .but  the 


254 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  149j 


genuine  sense  of  this  word  is  the  great 
mailer  of  debate.  Some  derive  it  from 
.Tubal,  the  inventor  of  musical  instru- 
ments. Gen.  4.  21,  and  suppose  that  tliis 
jear  was  named  after  him  from  its 
being  a  year  of  mirth  and  ji>3',  on  which 
n)u>ic  is  a  common  attendant.  Our 
Kiiglish  word  jovial  is  traced  to  tlie 
same  origin.  Others,  particularly  D. 
Kimchi,  contend  that  jobel  (yobel)  sig- 
nities  a  ram  in  Arabic,  and  that  this 
year  was  so  called  because  it  wns  pro- 
claimed with  trumpets  made  of  rams^ 
horns.  Tiiis  is  somewhat  countenanced 
by  the  Chal.  Targ.  which  occasionally 
renders  yobel  by  Jt~ii"iT  dikra,  a  ram. 
Bochart  and  others,  however,  doubt 
wliether  rams'  horns  were  ever  employed 
as  trumpets,  but  think  that  the  *  horns,' 
'  cornets,'  &c.  of  the  Scripture  were 
either  the  horns  of  oxen,  or  brazen 
trumpets  in  the  form  of  rams'  horns. 
Hottinger  is  of  opinion  that  yobel  is  a 
word  designed  to  denote  rather  the  pe- 
culiar kind  of  sound  made  by  the  instru- 
ment, than  the  instrument  itself.  Bishop 
Patrick  espouses  this  etymology,  and 
conceives  the  year  to  have  been  called 
yobel  from  the  sound  every  where  made, 
just  as  the  feast  of  the  Passover  was 
called  nri  pesa'h,  from  the  angel's 
passing  over  the  Israelites  when  he 
slew  the  Egyptians.  Another,  and  per- 
haps as  probable  an  opinion  as  any  of 
the  preceding  is,  that  ^21"'  yobel  comes 
from  the  verb  "^"2"^  ydbal,  which  in  Hi- 
phil  is  ^"^Lin  hobil,  and  signifies  to 
recall,  restore,  bring  back  ;  because  this 
year  restored  liberty  to  the  slaves,  and 
brought  back  alienated  estates  to  their 
original  possessors.  This  would  seem 
to  be  the  view  which  the  Sept.  takes  of 
the  word  by  rendering  it  afeai;,  a  remis- 
sion,  and  also  Josephus,  who  renders  it 
t)^£vOr,piau,  liberty.  From  this  variety 
of  interpretations  the  reader  is  neces- 
sarily lelt  by  the  commentator  to  choose 
that  which  he  deems  most  plausible. 
Absolute  certainty  is  unattainable. 

Whatever  may  be  the  meaning  of  the 
term,  and  whatever  the  nature  of  the 


I  instruments  employed,  it  is  held  by  all 
llie  Jewibh  writers  that  trumpets  were 
sounded  extensively  all  over  the  land, 
in  ihe  mountains,  in  the  streets,  and  at 
nearly  every  door.  It  was  intended  as 
a  universal  waking  up  of  all  the  popu- 
lation to  ihe  occurrence  of  this  joyous 
festival.  It  was  not  enough  tliat  the 
year  and  the  day  should  be  fixed,  and 
come  round  in  silence.  The  spirits 
which  had  been  depressed  by  great  re- 
verses of  fortune  were  to  be  exhilaratei^ 
by  the  cheering  annunciation,  and  all 
indifTerence  and  torpor  to  be  shaken  off. 
The  Jubilee  in  fact  began  on  the  first 
day  of  the  monih  Tisri,  but  the  real  ob- 
jectsof  the  institution  did  not  develops 
themselves  till  the  tenth  which  was  the 
great  day  of  atonement.  But  ilie  pre- 
vious nine  diys  were  spent  in  great  fes- 
tivity and  joj',  resembling  in  some 
respects  the  Roman  Saturnalia.  The 
slaves  did  no  work  for  their  masters, 
but  crowned  themselves  with  garlands, 
and  ate,  and  drank,  and  made  merry. 
On  the  tenth  day,  the  proper  authori- 
ties, called  *  the  house  of  judgment,'  or 
the  great  Sanhedrim,  directed  the  trum- 
pets to  be  sounded  ;  and  at  that  instant 
the  bondmen  became  free,  and  lands 
reverted  to  their  original  owners. 

The  two  grand  distinguishing  charac- 
teristics of  the  Jubilee  were  evidently 
manumission  of  servants  and  the  resti- 
tution of  estates.  If  any  of  the  Israel- 
ites had  been  reduced  to  a  stale  of  sla- 
very, whether  he  had  sold  himself 
voluntarily,  or  had  been  sold  for  debt, 
or  theft,  or  any  other  cause,  by  the 
sentence  of  the  judge,  now  was  the 
season  of  his  release.  The  day  dawned  ; 
the  trumpet-peal  was  heard,  and  the 
chains  of  bondage  fell  from  the  exulting 
slave.  With  his  w  ife  and  children,  and 
all  that  he  had,  he  set  forth  from  the 
house  of  his  bondage,  and  felt  himself 
possessed  of  liberty  which  no  hand  of 
power  or  of  fraud  might  invade.  Even 
those  who  had  not  seen  fit  to  avail 
themselves  of  the  emancipation  afforded 
by  the  law  at  the  end  of  six  years'  ser. 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXV. 


'^55 


9  Then  shah  thou  cause  the  trum- 
pet of  the  jubilee  to  sound,  on  the 

vitude,  but  had  expressed  their  deter- 
niinalion,  by  hiiving  their  ears  bored 
with  an  awl,  and  fasiened  to  the  door 
ofiheir  master's  house,  were  now  to  go 
o'ut  perfectly  free  under  the  general 
procl:innaiion  ol"  liberty  to  the  captive. 
How  striking  a  type  of  the  release  from 
spiritual  thraldom  as  announced  at  the 
Gospel  Jubilee,  when  our  Saviour  in  the 
synagogue  read  from  the  prophet  Isaiah, 
'  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me, 
because  he  hath  anointed  me  to  preach 
the  gospel  to  the  poor,  he  hath  sent  me 
to  Ileal  the  broken-hearted,  to  preach 
deliverance  to  the  captives,  and  recov- 
eri»ig  of  sight  to  the  blind,  to  set  at  lib- 
erty them  that  are  bruised,  to  preach 
the  acceptable  year  of  the  Lord  ;'  and 
then  added,  *  This  day  is  this  Scripture 
fulfilled  in  your  ears.'  The  Gospel 
dispensation  is  the  sinner's  jubilee,  and 
as  the  word  '  jubilee '  implies  a  joyful 
sound,  so  the  word  'Gospel'  signifies 
glad  tidings  ;  and  blessed  are  they  who 
hear  and  welcome  the  sound  of  joy 
which  it  sends  forth. 

No  less  benign  and  gracious  was  the 
other  feature  of  this  remarkable  insti- 
tution If  any  of  the  Israelites,  through 
misfortune,  imprudence,  or  misconduct, 
had  been  obliged  to  sell  his  patrimonial 
lands,  or  any  part  of  them,  they  were 
returned  to  him  free  of  incumbrance  at 
the  year  of  Jubilee,  if  he  could  not  re- 
deem them  sooner.  No  matter  how 
often  the  property  had  changed  hands, 
it  was  now  restored  to  the  original 
owner  or  to  his  heirs.  The  Israelite 
whom  calamity  or  improvidence  had 
driven  abroad,  needed  no  longer  to  wan- 
der for  want  of  a  home  of  his  own  to 
welcome  him.  A  home  there  always 
was,  would  he  but  choose  to  reclaim  it. 
How  wise  and  merciful  this  appoint- 
ment !  How  admirably  adapted  to  pre- 
serve a  wholesome  equality  of  condi- 
tion among  all  classes  !  The  rich  could 
tot  accunmlute  all  the  lands,  nor  esta- 


tenth  day  of  the  seventh  month, 


blish  a  permanent  monopoly  of  wealth. 
The  man  of  avarice,  who  had  gone  on 
adding  house  to  house  and  field  to  field, 
gained  no  permanent  advantage  over  his 
less  fortunate  neighbor.  The  fiftieth 
year,  beyond  which  no  lease  could  run, 
was  always  approaching  with  silent  but 
sure  speed,  to  relax  his  tenacious  grasp. 
However  alienated,  however  unworthily 
or  unthriftily  sold,  however  strongly 
conveyed  to  the  purchaser  or  the  usurper 
an  estate  might  be,  this  long-expected 
day  annulled  the  whole  transaction,  and 
placed  the  debtor  in  the  condition  which 
either  himself  or  his  ancestor  had  en- 
joyed. In  virtue,  moreover,  of  this 
gracious  ordinance  forbidding  the  per- 
petual alienation  of  the  land,  a  regular 
genealogy  of  every  particular  tribe  and 
family  would  be  preserved,  and  thus 
evidence  aflforded  of  the  exact  fulfil- 
ment of  the  prophecies  respecting  the 
Messiah,  and  the  stock  from  which  he 
should  spring. 

So  marked  was  the  wisdom,  so  man- 
ifold the  blessings  of  this  divine  institu- 
tion !  That  its  typical  import  conducts 
us  onward  to  the  heart  of  the  gospel 
economy,  as  ushered  in  by  Christ,  we 
have  already  remarked.  But  that  it 
has  a  reach  still  more  extended,  and, 
like  the  sabbatical  year,  shadows  out  a 
stale  of  permanent  prosperity,  happi- 
ness, joy,  and  glory,  in  the  latter  periods 
of  this  world's  history,  we  have  no 
doubt.  Like  many  other  features  of  the 
Levitical  economy,  its  substance  has 
never  yet  been  realized.  That  is  re- 
served for  that  blissful  era  announced 
by  the  seventh,  or  jubilee  trumpet  of 
the  Apocalypse,  when  the  grand  coa« 
summation  of  all  prophetic  blessedness 
shall  take  place. 

9.  Thou  Shalt  cause  the  trumpet  of 
the  jubilee  to  sound.  Heb.  n*l22>n 
nS'Tin  ^5TtJ  haabarta  shophtr  teruahf 
shalt  cause  to  pa^s  through  the  trumpet 
of  loud  sound.    That  is,  shalt  cause  il 


256 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1491. 


ein  the  day  of  atonement  shall  ye 
make  the  trumpet  sound  through- 
out all  your  land. 

10  And  ye  shall  hallow  the  fifti- 
eth year,  and  d  proclaim  liberty 
throughout «//  the  land  unto  all  the 
inhabitants  thereof:  it  shall  be  a 
jubilee  unto  you;  eand  ye  shall 
return  every  man  unto  his  posses- 
sion, and  ye  shall  return  every  man 
unto  his  family. 

11  A  jubilee'  shall  that  fiftieth 
year  be  unto  you:  fye  shall  not 

c  ch.  23.  24,  27.  <!  Isai.  61.  2,  and  63.  4. 
Jer.  34.  8,  15,  17.  Luke  4.  19.  e  ver.  13. 
Numb.  36.  4.     f  ver.  5. 

to  be  sounded  all  over  the  land  from  one 
end  to  ihe  other,  that  the  most  general 
proclamation  might  be  made.  Thus  in 
Ezra  1.  1,  'The  Lord  stirred  up  the 
spirit  of  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  that  he 
made  a  proclamation  throughout  all  his 
kingdom.'  Heb.  '  He  made  a  voice  to 
pass  through  all  his  kingdom.'  The 
Hebrew  word  answering  to  '  jubilee  '  in 
the  next  verse  does  not  occur  here,  and 
the  utmost  accuracy  would  perhaps 
have  led  to  the  adoption  of  another 
mode  of  rendering.  In  Num.  10.  5,  the 
word    for    '  loud    sound  '    is    rendered 

'  alarm' — '  when  ye  blow  an  alarm.'' 

IT  In  the  day  of  atonement.  This  was 
the  general  fast-day,  in  which,  with 
every  returning  year,  the  whole  con- 
gregation humbled  themselves  and 
afflicted  their  souls  before  God,  and  the 
high-priest  made  atonement  for  them  in 
the  holy  place.  The  annunciation  of 
the  jubilee  was  very  wisely  fixed  to 
this  period,  as  it  might  be  considered 
that  they  would  be  better  disposed  to 
forgive  their  brethren  their  debts  when 
they  had  so  recently  been  receiving  the 
pardon  of  their  own  trespasses.  The 
Jubilee  was  a  festival  of  joy,  and  a 
sanctified  joy  can  be  preceded  by  no- 
thing more  suitable  than  deep  humilia- 
lion  and  godly  sorrow  for  sin. 

10.  Proclaim  liberty.  That  is,  lib- 
erty for  Hebrew  servants  to  leave  the 


sow,  neither  reap  that  which  grow- 
eth  of  itself  in  it,  nor  gather  the 
grapes  in  it  of  thy  vine  undressed. 

12  For  it  is  the  jubilee;  it  shall 
be  holy  unto  you :  g  ye  shall  eat  the 
increase  thereof  out' of  the  field. 

1.3  h  In  the  year  of  this  jubilee  ye 
shall  return  every  man  unto  his 
possession. 

14  And  if  thou  sell  aught  unto 
thy  neighbour,  or  buyest  aughL  ol 
thy  neighbour's  hand,  iye  shall 
not  oppress  one  another: 

S  ver.  6,  7.  h  ver.  10.  ch.  27.  24.  Numb. 
36.  4.  '  ver.  17.  ch.  19.  13.  1  Sam.  12.  3, 
4.     Mic.  2.  2.     1  Cor.  6.  8. 


service  of  their  masters  ;  particularly 
such  as  had  not  availed  themselves  of 
the  privilege  granted,  Ex.  21.  2,6,  ot 
going  out  of  servitude  on  the  seventh 
year,  but  had  their  ears  bored  as  a  sig- 
nal of  serving  *  for  ever,'  or  until  the 
year  of  jubilee  arrived.  But  now  that 
year  having  arrived,  their  '  ever '  was  at 
an  end,  and  they  went  out  of  course. 

IT  Ye  shall  return  every  man  unto 

his  possession.  To  his  house  or  land, 
which  he  may  have  been  compelled  to 
sell,  and  to  his  family,  from  which  he 
may  have  been  estranged  by  the  loss  of 
his  liberty.  The  Israelites  had  a  por- 
tion of  land  divided  to  each  family  by 
lot.  This  portion  of  the  promised  land 
they  held  of  God,  and  were  not  to  dis- 
pose of  it  as  their  property  in  fee-sim- 
ple. Hence  no  Israelite  could  part 
with  his  landed  estate  but  for  a  term  of 
years  only.  When  the  jubilee  arrived 
it  again  reverted  to  the  original  owners. 

12.  Ye  shall  eat  the  increase  thereof 
out  of  the  field.  That  is,  the  sponta- 
neous increase  or  produce. 

14.  If  thou  sell  aught,  &c.  As  the 
divine  lawgiver  took  care  that  the 
wealth  of  some  should  not  oppress  the 
poverty  of  others,  by  the  law  of  jubilee 
that  a  poor  man  should  not  lose  his  land 
for  ever  ;  so  in  buying  the  land  of  the 
poor  he  would  not  have  the  rich  give 
less  for  it  than  it  was  worth,  any  more 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXV. 


257 


15  k  According  to  the  number  of 
years  after  the  jubilee,  thou  shall 
buy  of  thy  neighbour,  and  accord- 
ing unto  the  number  of  years  of 
the  fruits  he  shall  sell  unto  thee  : 

16  According  to  the  multitude  of 
years  thou  shall  increase  the  price 
thereof,  and  according  to  the  few- 
ness of  years  thou  shall  diminish 
the  price  of  it :  for  according  to 
the  number  of  the  years  of  the 
fruits  doth  he  sell  unto  thee. 

17  lYe  shall  not  therefore  op- 
press one  another ;  m  but  thou 
shall  fear  thy  God :  for  I  am  the 
Lord  your  God. 

IS  H  n  Wherefore  ye  shall  do  my 
statutes,  and  keep  my  judgments, 
and  do  them  ;  ©and  ye  shall  dwell 
in  the  land  in  safety. 

19  And  the  land  shall  yield  her 

k  ch.  -27.  ly,  23.  ■  ver.  14.  m  ver.  43.  ch. 
19.  14,  3-2.  n  ch.  19.  37.  «  rh.  26.  5.  Deut. 
1-2.  10.     Ps.  4.  8.     Prov.  1.  33.     Jer.  23.  6. 


than  he  would  have  the  poor  man  re- 
quire more  for  it  than  its  just  value, 
computing  to  the  time  of  the  next  jubi- 
lee. It  seems  to  be  a  general  injunction 
of  equity,  the  particular  application  of 
whicli  is  shown  in  the  verses  imme- 
diately following. 

15.  According  to  the  number  of  years, 
&c.  The  purchases  that  were  to  be 
made  of  lands  were  to  be  regulated  by 
the  number  of  years  which  remained  to 
the  next  jubilee.  This  was  something 
like  buying  the  unexpired  term  of  a  lease 
among  us  ;  the  purchase  being  always 
regulated  by  the  number  of  years  be- 
tween the  time  of  purchase  and  the  ex- 
piration  of  the  term.  It  is  easy  to 
perceive  that  the  nearer  the  jubilee  was. 
the  less  would  be  the  value  of  the  land  ; 
therefore  it  is  said  ;  '  According  to  the 
fewness  of  the  years  thou  shalt  diminish 
the  price.' IT  According  to  the  num- 
ber of  the  years  of  the  fruits.  They 
were  to  reckon  only  the  productive 
years,  and  therefore  must  discount  for 
the  sabbatical  years. 

22* 


fruit,  and  pye  shall  eat  your  fill, 
and  dwell  therein  in  safety. 

20  And  if  ye  shall  say,  qWhat 
shall  we  eat  the  seventh  year? 
behold,  rwe  shall  not  sow  nor 
gather  in  our  increase  : 

21  Then  I  will  s  command  my 
blessing  upon  you  in  the  sixth  year, 
and  it  shall  bring  forth  fruit  for 
three  years. 

22  t  And  ye  shall  sow  the  eighth 
year,  and  eat  yet  of  u  old  fruit  until 
the  ninth  year;  until  her  fruits 
come  in  ye  shall  eat  of  the  old 
store. 

23  H  The  land  shall  not  be  sold 
for  ever;  for  x  the  land  is  mine,  for 
ye  are  y  strangers  and  sojourners 
with  me. 

P  ch.  26.  5.  Eiek.  34.  25,  27,  23.  q  Matt. 
6.  25,  31.  r  ver.  4,  5.  s  Deut.  28.  8.  See 
Exod.  16.  29.  t  2  Kings  19.  29.  "  Josh.  5. 
IJ,  12.  X  Deut.  32.  43.  2  Chron.  7.  20.  Ps. 
85.  1.  Joel  2.  18,  and  3.  2.  y  1  Chron.  29. 
16.    Ps.  39.  12,  and  119.  19.     1  Pet.  2.  11. 


17.  Thou  shalt  fear  thy  God.  This 
would  be  the  great  guaranty  for  the 
strict  observance  of  the  foregoing  pre- 
cepts, as  '  by  the  fear  of  the  Lord  men 
depart  from  iniquity.' 

Promises  to  Obedience. 

18.  Ye  shall  dwell  in  the  land  tn 
safety.  Heb.  nt:nb  labeta'h,  in  confi- 
dent-safety. The  Heb.  word  expresses 
both  the  boldness  and  confidence  with 
which  men  that  fear  and  obey  God  trust 
in  him,  and  the  safety  and  security 
which  they  feel  in  his  protection  ia 
times  of  doubt  or  danger. 

Law  of  Redemption  of  Land. 
23.  The  land  shall  not  be  sold  for 
ever.  As  the  root  of  the  original  word 
here  rendered  '  for  ever,'  signifies  to  cut 
entirely  off,  the  meaning  in  this  case 
probably  is  that  the  land  should  not  be 
sold  in  such  a  manner  as  to  be  entirely 
cut  off  from  redemption;  i.  e.  wholly 
and  absolutely  alienated  from  the  hand 
of  the  proprietor.    This  was  forbidden 


258 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1491. 


24  And  in  all  the  land  of  your 
possession  ye  shall  grant  a  redemp- 
tion for  the  land. 

25  Hz  If  thy  brother  be  waxen 
poor,  and  hath  sold  away  some  of 
[lis  possession,  and  if  ^any  of  his 
kin  come  to  redeem  it,  then  shall 
he  redeem  that  which  his  brother 
sold. 

26  And  if  the  man  have  none  to 
redeem  it,  and  himself  be  able  to 
redeem  it. 

z  Ruth  2.  20,  and  4.  4,  6.  a  See  Ruth  3.  2, 
9.  12.     Jer.  32.  7,  8. 

because  as  God,  in  a  miraculous  manner, 
gave  them  possession  of  this  land,  they 
were  lo  consider  tliemselves  merely  as 
tenants  to  him  ;  and,  therefore,  he  as 
the  great  landholder  or  lord  of  the  soil, 
prescribes  lo  them  the  conditions  on 
which  they  shall  hold  it. 

24.  Grant  a  redemption  for  the  land. 
That  is,  the  privilege  of  redemption  ; 
so  that  he  who  sold  it.  if  he  became 
able,  or  his  kinsman  or  relations  in  case 
he  died,  might  redeem  it  in  the  interim 
before  the  next  jubilee  ;  but  if  it  was 
not  done  before  the  year  of  jubilee,  it 
was  not  then  redeemed,  but  was  re- 
stored gratis  in  virtue  of  the  jubilee-law. 

25.  IJ  thy  brother  be  uaxen  poor,  &c. 
We  learn  from  Maimonides  that  it  was 
s^eldom  that  houses  or  lands  were  sold 
among  the  Jews  till  the  year  of  jubilee, 
except  from  the  pressure  of  poverty. 
For  purposes  of  gainful  traffic  it  was 
almost  never  done.  When  want  and 
distress  were  the  prompting  cause,  pro. 
vision  was  kindly  made  for  their  re- 
demption.  IT  If  any  of  his  kin  come 

to  redeem  it.  Heb.  '  The  redeemer 
thereof,  he  that  is  near  unto  him,  shall 
eome  and  shall  redeem,'  The  Heb. 
word  lor  redeem  (2i43  goi'l),  is  the  term 
applied  to  the  kinsman  to  whom  per- 
tained the  right,  according  to  a  very 
ancient  usage,  of  redeeming  lands, 
houses,  or  persons,  and  also  of  avenging 
the  blood  of  one  slain.  The  person 
sustaining  this  office  wus  a  lively  figure 


27  Then  b  let  him  count  the  years 
of  the  sale  thereof,  and  restore  the 
overplus  unto  the  man  to  whom 
he  sold  it;  that  he  may  return 
unto  his  possession. 

28  But  if  he  be  not  able  to  restore 
tl  to  him,  tlien  that  which  is  sold 
shall  remain  in  the  hand  of  him 
that  hath  bought  it  until  the  year 
of  jubilee:  cand  in  the  jubilee  it 
shall  go  out,  and  he  shall  return 
unto  his  possession. 

b  ver.  50,  51,  62.     c  yer.  13. 

of  Christ,  who,  assumed  our  nature  that 
he  might  become  our  kinsman-redeemer, 
bone  of  our  bone  and  flesh  of  our  flesh, 
and  in  reference  to  whom  it  is  said.  Is. 
59.  20,  *  The  redeemer  shall  come  out 
ofZion.'  He  has  by  his  sufferings  and 
dealh  bought  back  to  man  that  inherit- 
ance which  had  betn  forfeited  by  sin. 

IT   That  which    his    brother    sold. 

Heb.  T^ns^  n::^?2  mimkar  a'hiv,  the 
sale  of  his  brother. 

26.  And  himself  be  able  to  redeem  it. 
Heb.  '  His  hand  hath  attained  unto,  and 
he  hath  found  the  sufficiency  of  the  re 
demption  ;'  i.  e.  the  requisite  means  of 
making  the  redemption.  This  is  con- 
strued, however,  by  the  Rabbinical  wri- 
ters to  imply  that  he  must  have  grown 
able  from  his  own  means  to  re-purchase 
tiie  property,  and  that  he  was  not  lo  do 
it  by  borrowing. 

27.  Then  let  him  count,  &c.  That 
is,  let  him  count  the  years  from  the 
time  the  sale  was  made  unto  the  next 
ensuing  jubilee  ;  computing  the  income 
for  the  years  that  remain,  and  paying 
for  them  at  the  original  rate  agreed 
upon  at  the  time  of  sale.  If,  ibr  in- 
stance, one  sold  a  field  to  another  ten 
years  before  a  jubilee,  and  at  the  end 
of  five  years  wished  to  redeem  it,  he 
paid  ihe  purchaser  half  the  price  at 
which  he  bought  it ;  and  so  on  in  that 
proportion,  according  to  the  lime.  A 
fair  estimate  was  to  be  made  of  the 
probable  proceeds  of  the  land  during 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXV. 


259 


29  And  if  a  man  sell  a  dwelling- 
house  in  a  walled  city,  then  he 
may  redeem  it  within  a  whole 
year  after  it  is  sold  :  icilhiji  a  full 
year  may  he  redeem  it. 

30  And  if  it  be  not  redeemed 
within  the  space  of  a  full  year, 
then  the  house  that  is  in  the  walled 
city  shall  be  established  for  ever 
to  him  that  bought  it,  throughout 
his  generations:  it  shall  not  go  out 
in  tlie  jubilee. 

31  But  the  houses  of  the  villages 
which  have  no  walls  round  about 
them,  shall  be  counted  as  the  fields 
of  the  country :  they  may  be  re- 
deemed, and  they  shall  go  out  in 
the  jubilee. 

32  Notwithstanding  dthe  cities 
of  the  Leviies,  and  the  houses  of 

d  See  Numb.  35.  2.     Josli. -21.  2,  &c. 

the  interval  to  the  jubilee,  and  this  was 
to  be  allowed  to  the  buyer.  This  is 
termed  '  restoring  the  overplus.' 
The  Difference  in  the  terms  of  Redemp- 
tion in  respect  to  City  and  Country 
Houses. 

29.  If  a  man  sell  a  dwelling-house  in 
a  walled  city.  Heb.  ri?2in  ^"^"S  ir 
'hornah,  a  city  of  wall.  Houses  in  wall- 
ed cities  were  more  the  fruit  of  their 
own  industry  than  land  in  the  country, 
which  was  the  immediate  gift  of  God; 
and,  therefore,  if  a  man  sold  a  house  in 
a  city,  he  might  redeem  it  any  time 
within  a  year  after  the  date,  but  other- 
wise it  was  confirmed  to  the  purchaser 
for  ever,  and  should  no  more  return  to 
the  original  proprietor,  not  even  in  the 
year  of  jubilee.  This  provision  was 
made  to  encourage  strangers  and  prose- 
lytes to  come  and  settle  among  them. 
Though  they  could  not  purchase  land 
in  Canaan  for  them.selves  and  their 
heirs,  yet  they  might  purchase  houses 
in  walled  cities,  which  would  be  most 
convenient  for  them  who  were  sup- 
posed to  live  by  trade.  But  country 
villages  could  be  disposed  of  no  other- 
wise than  as  lands  might, 


the  cities  of  their  possession,  may 
the  Levites  redeem  at  any  time. 

33  And  if  a  man  purchase  of  the 
Levites,  then  the  house  that  was 
sold,  and  the  city  of  his  possession 
e  shall  go  out  in  Me  year  o/jubilee; 

I  for  the  houses  of  the  cities  of  the 
j  Levites  are  their  possession  among 
the  children  of  Israel. 

34  But  f  the  field  of  the  suburbs 
of  their  cities  may  not  be  sold,  for 
it  is  their  perpetual  possession. 

35  ^Andif  thy  brother  be  waxen 
poor,  and  fallen  in  decay  with  thee ; 
then  thou  shalt  g  relieve  him  :  yea, 
though  he  be  a  stranger,  or  a  so- 
journer; that  he  may  live  with 
thee. 

e  ver.  23.  f  See  Acts  4.  36,  37.  S  Deut. 
15.  7,  S.  Ps.  37.  -26,  and  41.  1,  and  112.  5,  9. 
Prov.  14.  31.  Luke  6.  35.  Acts  11.  29. 
Rom.  12.  IS.     IJohn  3.  17. 


Exception  in  favor  of  the  Levites. 

32  Notwithstanding  the  cities  of  the 
Levites,  &c.  This  was  doubtless  be- 
cause the  Levites  had  no  other  posses- 
sions than  the  forty-eight  cities  with 
their  suburbs  which  were  assigned 
them,  and  God  would  show  that  the 
Levites  were  his  peculiar  care ;  and  it 
was  for  the  interest  of  the  public  that 
they  should  not  be  impoverished  or  de- 
prived of  their  possessions.  Therefore 
as  their  houses  in  these  cities  were  the 
whole  of  what  they  could  call  their  own, 
they  could  not  be  utterly  alienated. 

Compassion  to  be  had  of  the  Poor. 

35.  Fallen  in  decay.  Heb.  Ill  rit3?a 
mdtdh  yddo,  his  hand  waver eth.  Gr. 
a^vvuTTjaT]  rats  ■^tpaiv  avrov,  is  weak  in 
his  hands.  That  is,  disabled  from  help- 
ing himself;  one  who  was  unable  to 
help  himself,  as  if  his  hand  were  shak- 
ing with   the  palsy. IT  Thou  shalt 

relieve  him.  Heb.  in  npTHn  he'hezakta 
bo,  thou  shalt  strengthen  him.  That  is, 
thou  shall  extend  to  him  relief,  which  is 
otherwise  expressed  by  holding  or 
strengthening  the  hands  of  the  weak 
and  needy. IT  That  he  may  live  mth 


260 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1491. 


36  hTake  thou  no  usury  of  him, 
or  increase;  but  ifear  thy  God; 
that  thy  brother  may  live  with  thee. 

37  Thou  shalt  not  give  him  thy 
njoney  up(jn  usury,  nor  lend  him 
thy  victuals  for  increase. 

38  kl  am  the  Lord  your  God, 
which  brought  you  forth  out  of  the 
h»nd  of  Egypt,  to  give  you  the  land 
uf  Canaan,  and  to  be  your  God. 

39  II  And    1  if    thy   brother   that 

h  Exod.  22.  25.  Deut.  23.  19.  Neh.  5.  7. 
Ps,  \b.  5.  Prov.  2S.  8.  Ezek.  18.  S,  13,  17, 
and  22.  12.  '  ver.  17.  Neh.  5.  9.  k  ch.  22. 
\il,  33.  1  Exod.  21.  2.  Deut.  15.  12.  1 
Kings  9.  22.  2  Kings  4.  1.  Neh.  5.  5.  Jer. 
.34.  14. 


thee  ;  i.  e.  that  he  may  be  enabled  to 
r'-cover  himself  out  of  his  calamities 
and  live  prosperously  among  you. 
'  Life  '  in  tlie  Scriptures  is  often  used  in 
opposition  to  sickness,  distress,  calam- 
ity, as  Isai,  3S.  9,  '  The  writing  of  Hez- 
eliiah  king  cf  Judah,  when  he  had  been 
sick,  and  was  recovered,  (Heb.  was 
made  alive)  of  his  sickness.'  Neh.  4. 
2,  '  Will  they  revive  (Heb.  make  alive) 
ihe  stones  out  of  the  heaps  of  the  rub- 
bish which  are  burned  V  1  Chron.  11.  S, 
*  And  Joab  repaired  (Heb.  made  alive) 
the  rest  of  the  city.'  Gen.  45.  27,  '  And 
the  spirit  of  Jacob  their  father  revived, 
(Heb.  was  made  alive).' 

36.  Take  thou  7W  usury  of  him.  The 
original  term  'I'r^  neshek  comes  from 
the  verb  'li;]  nashak,  to  bite,  mostly 
applied  to  the  bite  of  a  serpent,  and 
properly  signifies  biting  tisury,  so 
called  perhaps  because  it  resembles  the 
bite  of  a  serpent ;  for  as  this  is  often 
so  small  as  to  be  scarcely  perceptible 
at  first,  but  the  venom  soon  spreads  and 
diffuses  itself,  till  it  reaches  the  vitals, 
so  the  increase  of  usury,  which  at  first 
is  not  perceived,  at  length  grows  so 
much  as  to  devour  a  man's  substance. 
As  this  law  was  ordained  merely  to 
prevent  cruel  exactions,  it  cannot  be 
considered  as  applying  to  that  reason- 
able compensation  for  the  use  of  money 
which  is  known  among  us  by  the  appel- 


dwelleth  by  thee  be  waxen  poor, 
and  be  sold  unto  thee  ;  thou  shalt 
not  compel  him  to  serve  as  a  bond- 
servant: 

40  But  as  an  hired  servant,  and 
as  a  sojourner  he  shall  be  with 
thee,  and  shall  serve  thee  unto  the 
year  of  jubilee : 

41  And  then  shall  he  depart  from 
thee,  both  he  and  his  children 
mwith  him,  and  shall  return  unto 
his  own  family,  and  nunlo  the 
possession  of  his  fathers  shall  he 
return. 

m  Exod.  21.  3.     n  yer.  23. 


lation  of  simple  interest.  See  Note  on 
Ex.  22.  25. 

An  Israelite  not  to  be  obliged  to  serve  as 
a  Slave. 
39.  And  be  sold  unto  thee.  Persons 
were  sometimes  sold  among  the  Jews 
by  judicial  process  when  they  had  been 
guilty  of  theft,  and  were  not  able  to 
make  satisfaction,  Ex.  21.  2.  Some 
were  sold  by  their  parents  ;  i.  e.  tiiey 
disposed  of  their  right  of  service  for  a 
stipulated  sum,  and  for  a  number  of 
years.  Others,  again,  when  reduced  to 
extreme  want,  sold  themselves,  as  we 
have  explained  more  at  large,  Ex.  21.  2. 
The  Jewish  writers  inform  us  that  this 
was  not  considered  lawful  except  in 
extreme  cases.  '  A  man  might  not  sell 
himself  to  lay  up  the  money  which  was 
given  for  him  ;  nor  to  buy  goods  ;  nor 
to  pay  his  debts,  but  merely  that  he 
might  get  bread  to  eat.  Neither  was  it 
lawful  for  him  to  sell  himself  as  long 
as  he  had  so  much  as  a  garment  left.' — 

Maimonides. IT  Thou  shalt  not  com- 

pel  him  to  serve  as  a  bond  servant.  That 
is,  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  his 
master  that  bought  him  had  as  absolute 
a  property  in  him  as  in  a  captive  taken 
in  war,  who  might  be  used,  sold,  and 
bequeathed,  at  pleasure,  as  much  as  a 
man's  cattle  ;  but  he  shall  serve  thee 
merely  as  a  hired  servant  whose  ser* 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXV. 


261 


42  For  they  are  oray  servants 
which  I  hrought  forth  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt ;  they  shall  not  be 
sold  as  bond-men. 

43  i>  Thou  shah  not  rule  over 
liini  q  with  rigour,  but  rshalt  fear 
il)y  God. 

44  Both  thy  bond-men  and  thy 
bond-maids,  whicii  thou  shah  have, 
simll  be  of  the  heathen  that  are 
round  about  you;  of  them  shall  ye 
buy  bond- men  and  bond-maids. 

^'  ver.    55.      Rom.    6.    22.       ]  Cor.  7.    23. 

P  Ephcs.  6.  9.     Col.  4.  1.     q  ver.  46.  Exod. 

1.  13.  r  ver.  IT.  Exod.  1.  17,  21.  Deut. 
25.  18.     Mai.  3.  6. 

vices  the  master  maj'^  command,  with- 
Kiil  pretending  to  a  despotic  power  over 
his  person. 

42.  They  shall  not  he  sold  as  bond- 
men. Thill  is,  not  in  the  open  public 
iiiiinner  that  other  servants  or  slaves 
were  sold  ;  not,  as  it  were,  in  the  mar- 
ket j)lace  ;  but  privately  and  in  a  more 
honorable  way.  But  the  spirit  of  the 
passage,  as  connected  with  the  next 
verse,  seems  to  be,  that  he  should  not 
be  taken  as  a  mere  slave,  but  as  a  hired 
servant,  or  as  a  brother  fallen  into  ad- 
versity, and  treated  as  an  Israelite  fear- 
ing God  would  desire  a  brother  Israel- 
ite to  treat  himself  in  the  same  circum- 
stances. 

43.  Thou  shall  not  rule  over  him  with 
rigor.  Heb.  "llSn  bepharek,  with 
fierceness.  See  the  term  explained  in 
the  Note  on  Ex.  I.  13,  where  it  is  ap- 
plied to  the  cruelty  of  Pharaoh's  task 
masters.  Gr. '  Thou  shalt  not  rack  nor 
afflict  them  with  labors.'  But  though 
forbidden  thus  to  tyrannise  over  their 
own  countrymen,  were  they  permitted 
to  treat  their  heathen  bondmen  with 
rigor  ?  On  this  the  Hebrew  writers  say, 
*  It  is  lawful  to  make  a  Canaanitish 
servant  serve  with  rigor,  but  notwith- 
standing this  right,  it  is  the  property 
of  mercy  and  way  of  wisdom  that  a 
man  should  be  compassionate,  and  fol- 
low justice,  and  not  make  his  yoke 
heavy  upon  his  servant  nor  afflict  him.' 


45  Moreover,  of  s  the  children  of 
the  strangers  that  do  sojourn  among 
you,  of  them  shall  ye  buy,  and  of 
their  families  that  are  with  you, 
which  they  begat  in  your  land: 
and  they  shall  be  your  possession. 

46  And  tye  shall  take  them  as 
an  inheritance  for  your  children 
after  you,  to  inherit  them  for  a 
possession,  they  shall  be  your  bond- 
men for  ever  :  but  over  your  breth- 
ren the  children  of  Israel,  uye  shall 
not  rule  one  over  another  with 
rigour. 

s  Isai.  5G.  3,  6.     t  Isai.  14.  2.     u  ver.  43. 


'  Labor  beyond  the  person's  strength, 
or  labor  too  long  continued,  or  in  un 
healthy  or  uncomfortable  places  and 
circumstances,  or  without  sufficient 
food,  &c.  is  labor  exacted  with  rigor, 
and  consequently  inhuman,  and  so  at 
variance  not  only  with  the  spirit  of  the 
Mosaic  dispensation,  but  with  the  max- 
ims of  right  conduct  among  every  peo- 
ple under  heaven.' — A.  Clarke. 

44.  Shall  be  of  the  heathen  that  are 
round  about  you.  That  is,  of  the  hea- 
then inhabiting  the  countries  round 
about  the  Holy  Land,  but  not  of  the 
Canaanites,  whom  they  were  required 

to  destroy. IT  Of  them  shall  ye  buy 

bond-men  and  bond-maids.  Heb.  IDpD 
tiknu,  shall  ye  obtain,  acquire,  whether 
by  purchase  or  otherwise.  We  have 
already  observed,  in  the  full  explana- 
lion  of  this  term,  Ex.  21.  2,  that  its 
general  import  is  that  of  acquisition, 
without  specifying  the  mode.  It  is  not 
improbable  that  heathen  bond-men  were 
occasionally  bought  by  the  Israelites, 
but  the  precept  has  doubtless  a  primary 
reference  to  such  as  were  taken  cap- 
lives  ia  war  ;  whence  the  Latin  name 
mancipia  is  supposed  to  be  equivalent 
to  manu  capti,  captured  by  the  hand, 
and  servus,  slave,  to  be  applied  to  one 
who  was  preserved  alive  when  he  might 
otherwise  have  been  killed.  The  rule 
permitted  them  also  to  obtain  by  pur- 
chase the  children  of  resident  foreign 


^2 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1491. 


47  If  And  if  a  sojourner  or  a 
stranger  wax  rich  by  thee,  and 
xthy  brother  that  dioelleth  by  him 
wax  poor,  and  sell  himself  unto 
the  stranger  or  sojourner  by  thee, 
or  to  the  stock  of  the  stranger's 
family  : 

48  After  that  he  is  sold  he  may 
be  redeemed  again;  one  of  his 
brethren  may  y  redeem  him  : 

49  Either  his  uncle,  or  his  uncle's 
son  may  redeem  him,  or  aiiy  that 
is  nigh  of  kin  unto  him  of  his  fam- 

^  ver.  25.  35.     y  Neh.  5.  5.     z  ver.  26. 


ers  among  them,  who,  though  they 
might  be  proselytes  of  the  gate,  yet 
were  not  circumcised ;  and  whom  the 
Chal.  therefore  denominates  '  uncir- 
cumcised  sojourners.' 

Of  the  Redemption  of  the  Israelitish 
Bond-man  from  the  hand  of  the  So- 
journer. 

47.  Sell  himself  unto  the  stranger. 
It  will  be  well,  in  reference  to  the  laws 
concerning  slavery  in  this  chapter,  to 
recollect  that  Moses  is  not  originating 
laws  to  give  a  sanction  to  slavery,  but 
is  interposing,  under  the  divine  com- 
mand, to  regulate  for  the  better  a  sys- 
tem already  in  operation.  We  discover 
the  existence  of  slavery  in  the  book  of 
Genesis,  and  are  aware  of  its  early  pre- 
valence in  all  countries.  Those  who 
are  acquainted  with  the  condition  of 
slaves  in  ancient  nations  will  not  fail 
to  recognise  the  wisdom  and  mercy  of 
the  various  regulations  on  the  subject 
vi'hich  are  given  here  and  elsewhere, 
and  which,  when  carefully  considered, 
will  be  found  in  all  instances  to  have 
an  obvious  tendency  to  protect  a  bond- 
man, and  to  ameliorate  his  condition, 
whether  a  native  or  a  foreigner.  The 
law  of  the  present  chapter  is  so  clearly 
announced  as  to  require  no  particular 
exposition.  On  the  above-cited  verse 
we  may  however  observe,  that  foreign- 
ers among  the  Jews  seem  to  have  been 
in   a  much   more  privileged   condition 


ily  may  redeem  him ;  or  if  z  he  be 
able,  he  may  redeem  himself. 

50  And  he  shall  reckon  with  him 
that  bought  him, from  the  year  that 
he  was  sold  to  him,  unto  the  year 
of  jubilee :  and  the  price  of  his 
sale  shall  be  according  unto  the 
number  of  years,  a  according  to  the 
time  of  an  hired  servant  shall  it 
be  with  him. 

51  li  there  be  yet  many  years  be- 
hind., according  unto  them  he  shall 
give  again  the  price  of  his  redemp- 

a  Job  7.  1.     Isai.  16.  14,  and  -21.  16. 


than  they  are  at  present  in  the  same  or 
any  Mohammedan  country.  We  see 
that  a  resident  foreigner  is  allowed  to 
purchase  any  Hebrew  whose  distressed 
circumstances  make  him  wish  to  sell 
his  liberty.  At  present  no  Christian  or 
Jew  in  a  Mohammedan  country  is  al- 
lowed to  have  as  a  slave,  we  will  not 
say  any  native,  but  any  Mohammedan 
of  any  country — nor,  indeed,  any  other 
than  Mohammedans,  except  negroes — 
who  are  the  only  description  of  slaves 
they  may  possess.'— P^c^  Bib. 

50.  And  he  shall  reckon,  &c.  In  or- 
der that  no  injustice  might  be  done  to 
the  master,  they  were  to  compute  how 
long  the  bond-man  had  served  him,  how 
long  he  had  still  to  serve,  and  what 
price  was  paid  for  him  ;  and  then,  ac« 
cording  to  the  number  of  years  elapsed, 
and  the  number  to  come,  the  right  sum 
was  made  out.  The  Jews  held,  that 
the  kindred  of  such  a  person  were  bound, 
if  in  their  power,  to  redeem  him,  lest 
he  should  be  swallowed  up  among  the 
heathen  J  and  we  find  from  Neh.  5.  8, 
that  this  was  done  by  the  Jews  on  their 
return  from  the  Babylonish  captivity; 
'  We,  after  our  ability,  have  redeemed 
our  brethren  the  Jews,  who  were  sold 

unto  the  heathen.' IT  According  to 

the  time  of  a  hired  servant  shall  it  be 
with  him.  That  is,  according  to  the 
rate  of  wages  ordinarily  allowed  to  a 
hired  servant  for  liie  like  period  of  time 
shall  the  sum  paid  for  him  be  estimated. 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 


263 


tion  out  of  the  money  that  he  was 
Dought  for. 

52  And  if  there  remain  but  few 
years  unto  the  year  of  jubilee,  then 
he  shall  count  with  him,  and  ac- 
cording unto  his  years  shall  he 
give  him  again  the  price  of  his 
redemption. 

53  And  as  a  yearly  hired  servant 
shall  he  be  with  him :  and  the 
other  shall  not  rule  with  rigour 
over  him  in  thy  sight. 

54  And  if  he  be  not  redeemed  in 
these  years,  then  b  he  shall  go  out 

bver.  41.     Exod*21.  2,  3. 


53.  Shalt  not  rule  with  rigor  over 
him  in  thy  sight.  That  is,  with  ihy 
connivance.  Thou,  an  Israelite,  shall 
not  knowingly  suffer  a  stranger  to  mal- 
treat or  abuse  one  of  their  own  brethren. 
It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  magistrates, 
upon  information,  to  call  such  an  one 
lo  account. 

54.  If  he  be  not  redeemed  in  those 
years.  Heb.  n^S*2  beilleh,  in  or  by 
these.  As  there  is  no  substantive  in  the 
original,  it  is  somewhat  doubtful  what 
word  is  to  be  supplied.  The  Gr.  has 
Kara  ravra,  by  these  things  or  means, 
i.  e.  neither  by  himself  or  others  before 
the  jubilee. 

55.  For  unto  me  the  children  of  Israel 
are  servants.  The  original  term  is  the 
same  that  has  hitherto  all  along  been 
rendered  '  bond-men  ;'  and  the  force  of 
the  intended  contrast  would  have  been 
stronger,  had  that  word  been  retained. 
Let  the  children  of  Israel  be  dealt  with 
as  I  have  commanded,  for  they  are  my 
bond-meh  in  a  far  higher  sense  than 
they  are  or  can  be  those  of  any  other. 


in  the  year  of  jubilee,  both  he,  and 
his  children  with  him. 
55  For  c  unto  me  the  children  of 
Israel  are  servants,  they  are  my 
servants  whom  I  brought  forth  out 
of  the  land  of  Egypt:  I  am  the 
Lord  your  God. 

CHAPTER  XXVI. 

YE  shall  make  you  a  no  idols  nor 
graven  image,  neither  rear 
•:  you  up  a  standing  image,  neither 
!  shall  ye  set  up  any  image  of  stone 
'  in  your  land,  to  bow  down  unto  it : 
'  for  I  am  the  Lord  your  God. 

i      c  ver.  4-2.     a  Exod.  20.   4,  5.     Deut.  5.  S, 

I  and  16.  22,  and  27.  15.     Ps.  97.  7. 

!  

of  obedience  on  the  one  hand,  and 
threatenings  of  punishment  in  case  of 
disobedience  on  the  other. 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

The  present  chapter  may  be  said  to 
be  a  solemn  practical  conclusion  to  the 
main  body  of  the  Levitical  law,  con- 
taining a  general  enforcement  of  all  its 
precepts  by  promises  of  reward  in  case 


Idolatry  forbidden. 

1.  Ye  shall  make  you  no  idols.     Heb. 

tD^">^i<  elclim,  nothings,  vanities.     Gr. 

Xtiponoirjra,   things  made  with   hands. 

It  is  a  term  expressive  of  the  utmost 

possible  contempt  towards  the  objects 

j  intended,  and  the  prohibition  comes  ia 

I  very  properly  in  this  place,  at  the  head 

j  of  these   solemn    injunctions,  idolatry 

being  the  grand  crowning  sin  which  they 

were  most  studiously  to  avoid.     For  a 

farther  explication  of  the  word,  see  on 

Lev.   19.  4. IT  Nor  graven  image. 

Heb.  ^DS  pesel,  i.  e.  any  thing  hewed 
I  or  sculptured  out   of  wood  or  stone. 

[  See  Note  on  on  Ex.  20.  4, IT  Stand- 

I  ing  image.     Heb.  n22?2  matzebuh,piU 
lar  or  statue  ;  i.  e.  either  a  single  stone, 
I  or  a  pile  of  stones  reared  and  conse- 
I  crated  to  religious  purposes.    Probably 
I  the  stones  or   pillars  which  were   at 
I  first  set  up  and  anointed  by  holy  men 
I  in  commemoration  of  signal  interposi- 
tions of  God  in  their  behalf,  were  after- 
wards abused  to  idolatrous  and  super- 
stitious purposes,  and  therefore  are  for- 
bidden.  IT  Image    of  stone.      Heb 

n*^DB:ia  pK  eben  maskith,  stone  of 
imagery,  or  stone  of  picture  or  figure j 
i.    e.    stones    curiously    wrought    and 


264 


LEVITICUS, 


CB.  C.  1491. 


2  H  b  Ye  shall  keep  my  sabbaths,      3  llcif  ye  walk  in  my  statutes 
and  reverence  ray  sanctuary :  I 
the  Lord. 


b  ch.    19.  30. 
2S.  1-14. 


Deut.    11.   ]3,   14,  15,   and 


carved  wiili  figures  in  relief,  which 
were  often  made  use  of  as  objects  of 
adoration  among  the  ancient  heathen.  | 
Chal.  *  Stone  of  worship.'  '  In  Ezek.  S.  I 
8-1],  there  is  a  description  of  a  subter- 
raneous vault,  the  walls  of  which  were 
covered  with  images  of  quadrupeds  and 
creeping  things,  exactly  like  those  of  j 
Egypt  which  are  covered  with  hiero-  j 
glyphic  figures.  In  the  12th  verse  this 
vault  is  called  n^-r?2  "Mil  hadar  mas-  j 
kith,  wnicn  our  translation  excellently 
renders  '  chambers  of  imagery.'  Now 
the  same  word  being  used  in  two  places 
with  an  analogous  context,  it  is  fair  to 
infer,  that  if  an  hieroglyphic  cave  is 
intended  in  Ezekiel,  an  hieroglyphic 
stone  is  intended  here  ;  which  is  the 
more  probable  when  we  recollect  that 
the  Israelites  were  at  this  time  fresh 
Irom  Egypt,  and  deeply  infected  with 
the  rank  idolatries  of  that  country — 
insomuch  that  whenever  Moses  inter- 
dicts, at  this  early  period,  a  particular 
form  of  idolatry,  we  should  invariably 
feel  disposed  to  look  to  Egypt,  in  the 
first  instance,  for  the  example.  It  is 
well  known  that  the  Egyptian  priests, 
in  order  to  preserve  the  treasures  of 
knowledge  and  their  discoveries  in 
natural  science,  and  at  the  same  time  to 
render  them  inscrutable  to  any  but  the 
initiated  few,  made  use  not  of  common 
writing  but  of  hieroglyphics,  with 
which  they  inscribed  obelisks,  walls, 
and  even  subterraneous  chambers  and 
galleries,  as  well  as  square  stones. 
These  monuments  were  deified  by  the 
multitude,  who  worshipped  in  them 
Thoth,  the  Egyptian  god  of  learning. 
This  was  a  sufficient  reason  for  their 
interdiction  by  Moses.  But  had  he  no 
further  reason  ?  As  this  law,  if  it  be 
thus  rightly  understood,  would  operate 
to  the  exclusion  of  hieroglyphics,  are 
we  not  at  liberty  to  infer  that  Moses — 
or  rather  his  Divine  instructor — thus 


expressed  his  abhorrence  of  a  practice 
which  locked  up  knowledge  to  the  peo- 
ple for  the  purpose  of  enabling  the  priv- 
ileged few,  by  virtue  of  that  power 
which  knowledge  gives,  to  hold  in  en- 
tire thraldom  their  minds,  bodies,  and 
estates?  Micliaelis,  whose  view  of  this 
text  we  have  followed,  well  observe?, 
'  Had  Moses  been  only  a  wise  and  be- 
nevolent impostor  ;  had  he  given  him- 
self out  for  a  divine  messenger,  without 
being  so,  and  merely  from  love  to  an 
oppressed  people  ;  and  had  his  miracles 
been  nothing  more  than  human  devices  ; 
it  is  scarcely  conceivable  how  he  could 
ever  have  gone  the  length  oi' abolishing 
an  expedient  so  artfully  contrived,  and 
so  favorable  to  the  views  of  priestcraft, 
for  the  concealment  of  the  sciences. 
The  legislator,  therefore,  who  relin- 
quished such  an  expedient,  and  at  the 
same  time  founded  his  polity  on  the 
commandments  of  a  Deity,  could  be  no 
impostor,  but  must  have  been  an  honest 
man." — Pict.  Bib. 

The  Sabbath  and  the   Sanctuary  to  be 
Sanctified. 

2.  Ye  shall  keep  my  sabbaths.  That 
is,  my  different  days  of  sabbatical  rest ; 
not  only  the  sabbath  day,  but  other 
stated  solemnities,  which  were  to  be  dis- 
tinguished by  holy  convocations.  Next 
in  importance  to  the  charge  concerning 
idolatry  is  that  respecting  the  due  ob- 
servance of  the  sabbath  ;  and  we  ac- 
cordingly find  in  the  prophets,  that 
next  to  that  of  idolatry,  there  is  no  sin 
for  which  the  Jews  are  more  frequently 
reproved  and  threatened,  than  the  pro- 
fanation of  God's  holy  sabbaths.  The 
reverence  of  the  sanctuary  here  en- 
joined is  connected  with  the  keeping  of 
the  Sabbath  by  a  tie  of  intimacy  too 
obvious  to  need  remark. 

Promises  to  Obedience. 

3.  If  ye  walk    in  my  statutes,  &c. 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 


^65 


and  keep  my  commandments,  and 
<to  them ; 

4  tiThen  I  will  give  you  rain  in 
due  season,  « and  the  land  shall 
yield  her  increase,  and  the  trees 
of  the  field  shall  yield  their  fruit : 

5  And  f  your  threshing  shall  reach 
unto  the  vintage,  and  the  vintage 
shall  reach  unto  the  sowing-time; 
and  gye  shall  eat  your  bread  to 
the  full,  and  ^  dwell  in  your  land 
safely. 

d  Isai.  30.  23,  Eiek.  31.  26.  Joe!  2,  23,  24. 
e  Ps.  67.  6,  and  85.  12.  Ezek.  34.  27,  and  3G. 
30.  Zech.  8.  12.  f  Amos  9.  13.  g  ch.  25.  19. 
Deut.  11.1.5,  Joel  2.  19,  26.  h  ch.  25.  18. 
Job  11.  18.  Ezek.  34.  25,  27,  28.  >  1  Chron. 
22.9.  Ps.  29.  H,  and  147,  14.  Isai.  45.7. 
Hag.  2.  9, 


The  promises  and  threatenings  which 
follow  are  of  a  temporal  nature  ;  and  it 
has  been  questioned  whether  they  ex- 
tend to  individuals,  or  are  to  be  limited 
lo  the  Israelites  as  a  nation.  But  the 
happiness  and  prosperity  of  a  nation 
necessarily  involves  that  of  individuals  ; 
and  though  individuals  might  not  be 
uniformly  rewarded  or  punished  accord- 
ing to  their  obedience  or  disobedience, 
yet  the  temporal  retribution  announced 
was  sufficiently  uniform  to  evince  the 
particular  providence  which  guided  the 
people  of  Israel. 

4.  Then  will  I  give  you  rain.  Heb. 
t:S'^?2ir3  ">rnD  nathattl  gishm'ekem,  will 
give  your  rains.  So  certain  should  be 
their  showers  in  their  seasons,  so  infal- 
libly secured  by  promise,  that  they 
should  be  entitled  to  consider  and  call 
them  theirs;  *I  will  give  your  rains.' 

5.  Your  threshing  shall  reach  unto 
the  vintage.  That  is,  so  abundant  shall 
be  your  corn-crops  that  the  business  of 
threshing  shall  not  be  completed  before 
the  vintage  ;  and  again,  so  plentiful 
shall  be  the  produce  of  the  vine,  that  ye 
shall  not  be  able  to  finish  the  gathering 
and  pressing  of  your  grapes  till  sowing 
time  again  arrives.  We  meet  with  a 
similar  sentiment  in  the  prophet  Amos, 
ch.  9.  13, '  The  plowman  shall  overtake 

23 


6  And  i  I  will  give  peace  in  the 
land,  and  kye  shall  lie  down,  and 
none  shall  make  you  afraid  :  and  I 
will  rid  1  evil  beasts  out  of  the  land, 
neither  shall  m  the  sword  go 
through  your  land. 

7  And  ye  shall  chase  your  ene- 
mies, and  they  shall  fall  before  you 
by  the  sword. 

8  And  n  five  of  you  shall  chase  an 
hundred,  and  an  hundred  of  you 
shall  put  ten  thousand  to  flight: 
and  your  enemies  shall  fall  before 
you  by  the  sword. 

^  Job  11.  19.  Ps.  3.  5,  and  4.  8.  Isai.  35. 
9.  Jer.  30.  10.  Ezek.  .34.  25.  Hos.  2.  18. 
Zeph.  3.  13.  1  2  Kings  17.  25.  Ezek,  5.  17, 
and  14.  15.  m  Ezek.  14.  17.  nDeut.  32.  30. 
Josh.  23.  10. 

the  reaper,  and  the  treader  of  grapes 
him  who  soweth  seed.' 

6.  I  will  give  peace  in  your  land. 
Freedom  from  intestine  commotions 
and  insurrections,  which  often  arise 
from  poverty  and  discontent.  The  lan- 
guage seems  rather  to  refer  to  peace 
among  themselves,  while  the  '  sword 
in  the  latter  clause  of  the  verse  points 
rather  to  the  ravages  of  war  from  for- 
eign invasion.  The  blessings  here 
promised,  it  will  be  noticed,  are  set  ia 
contrast  with  the  main  judgments  which 
are  elsewhere  denounced  against  the 
Israelites,  Ezek.  14.  21,  to  wit,  famine, 
war,  and  evil  beasts.  See  also  Note 
on  V.  21. 

7.  Ye  shall  chase  your  enemies,  &c. 
That  is,  a  few,  a  mere  handful,  shall  be 
more  than  a  match  for  a  great  multi- 
tude, as  it  proved  in  the  conquest  of 
Canaan ;  insomuch  that  Joshua  says, 
enlarginguponthispromise,  Josh.23. 10, 
'  One  man  of  you  shall  chase  a  thou- 
sand.' This  was  signally  fulfilled  in 
the  days  of  Gideon  who  with  three  men 
put  to  flight  a  vast  army,  Judg.  7. 22. 
So  also  in  the  case  of  David's  worthies, 
of  whom  one  lifted  his  spear  against 
eight  liundred,  and  slew  three  hundred 
at  one  time,  2  Sam.  23.  8,  18, 1  Chron. 
11.11.    Three  men  also  broke  through 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1493- 


9  For  I  will  «>have  respect  unto 
you,  and  p  make  you  fruitful,  and 
multiply  you,  and  establish  my 
covenant  with  you. 

10  And  ye  shall  eat  qold  store, 
and  bring  forth  the  old  because  of 
the  new. 

11  'And  I  will  set  my  tabernacle 
among  you :  and  my  soul  shall  not 
e  abhor  you. 

o  Exod.  2.  25.  2  Kings  13.  23.  P  Gen.  17. 
6,  7.  Neh.  9.  23.  Ps.  107.  33.  q  ch.  26.  32. 
«•  Exod.  25.  8,  and  29.  45.  Josh.  22.  19.  Ps. 
76.  2.  Ezek.  37.  26,  27,  28.  Rev.  21.  3. 
s  ch.  20.  23.    Deut.  32.  19. 

the  host  of  the  Philistines,  1  Chroa. 
11.18.    Comp.  Deut.  32.  30. 

9.  For  I  will  have  respect  unto  you. 
Heb.  M'^^i^  *^n'i35  panithi  altkem,  I 
mill  turn  my  face  unto  you.  Gr. 
ei:i3\t\pui  e(p'  't)//aj  Kai  av^avZ  'vfias, 
I  will  look  upon  you  and  bless  you. 
Chal.  '  I  will  have  respect  by  my 
Word  to  do  good  unto  you.'  For  this 
favor  David  prays,  Ps.25. 16,  and  69. 17, 
and  when  God  had  delivered  Israel 
from  their  enemies,  it  is  said,  2  Kings 
13.  23,  '  The  Lord  was  gracious  unto 
them,  and  had  respect  unto  thenif  be- 
cause of  his  covenant.' IT  Establish 

my  covenant  with  you.  That  is,  invio- 
lably  keep  my  covenant  already  esta- 
blished, and  faithfully  perform  its  every 
stipulation. 

-  10.  Ye  shall  eat  old  store,  &c.  That 
is,  to  prevent  waste  from  superabun- 
dance,  ye  shall  eat  of  your  old  stock  of 
provisions,  notwithstanding    the    new 

crop  has  come  in. IT  Bring  forth 

the  old  because  of  the  new.  That  is,  ye 
shall  be  forced  to  '  bring  forth,'  or  re- 
move from  your  barns  and  garners,  the 
old  stock  of  your  corn,  in  order  to  make 
room  for  the  new. 

11.  And  I  will  set  my  tabernacle 
among  you.  That  is,  I  will  firmly  and 
permanently  establish  my  tabernacle 
among  you;  I  will  secure  its  contin- 
uance with  you.  In  addition  to  this,  its 
primary  sense,  the  passage  contains  in 
«fiect  the  grand  promise  of  the  Gospel 


12  t  And  I  will  walk  among  you, 
and  uwill  be  your  God,  and  ye 
shall  be  my  people. 

13  w I  am  the  Lord  your  God, 
which  brought  you  forth  out  of 
the  land  of  Egypt,  that  ye  should 
not  be  their  bond-men,  "and  I  have 
broken  the  bands  of  your  yoke,  and 
made  you  go  upright. 


t  2  Cor.  6.  16.  u  Exod.  6.  7.  Jer.  7.  23, 
and  11.  4,  and  30.  22.  Ezek.  11.  20,  and  36. 
28.  w  ch.  25.  38,  42,  66.  x  Jer.  2.  2C 
Ezek.  34.  27. 


dispensation^  viz. :  the  presence,  man- 
ifestation, and  in-dwelling  of  God  in 
human  nature.  So  John  1.  14,  *  The 
Word  was  made  flesh  and  dwelt  among 
us.  Gr. '  Tabernacled  among  us.'  Jesus 
Christ  was  the  true  tabernacle  of  God, 
and  though  this  promise  was  in  an  emi- 
nent manner  fulfilled  in  the  Savior's  in- 
habitation of  our  nature  while  accom- 
plishing his  work  on  earth,  yet  it  ap- 
pears  from  Rev.  21.  3,  that  we  are  to 
look  for  its  fulfilment  in  a  still  higher 
sense  at  some  future  period  of  this 
world's  history:  'And  I  heard  a  great 
voice  out  of  heaven  saying,  Behold, 
the  tabernacle  of  God  is  with  men,  and 
he  will  dwell  with  them.'  See  Note  on 
Ex.  29. 45,  where  this  promise  is  largely 
considered. IT  My  soul  shall  not  ab- 
hor you.  I  will  regard  you  with  tokens 
of  the  utmost  complacency ;  I  will  take 
delight  in  you,  and  impart  the  inward 
peace  of  my  spirit.  The  contrary  of 
this  is  threatened,  v.  30. 

12.  And  J  will  walk  among  you.  Chal. 
'  I  will  cause  my  Shekinah  to  dwell 
among  you.'  I  will  be  familiarly  con- 
versant among  you  by  the  visible  sym- 
bol of  my  presence,  conducting  your 
journeys  in  the  wilderness,  and  abiding 
in  the  tabernacle  and  temple  prepared 
for  me. 

13.  And  made  you  go  upright.  That 
is,  set  you  free  from  bondage ;  brought 
you  into  that  state  of  enlargement  in 
which  you  are  no  more  bowed  down  by 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 


-267 


14  1[y  But  if  you  will  not  hearken 
unto  me,  and  will  not  do  all  these 
commandments; 

15  And  if  ye  shall  z  despise  my 
statutes,  or  if  your  soul  abhor  my 
judgments,  so  that  ye  will  not  do 
all  my  commandments,  but  that 
ye  break  my  covenant : 

16  I  also  will  do  this  unto  you,  I 
will  even  appoint  over  you  a  ter- 
ror, b  consumption,  and  the  burning 
ague,  that  shall  c  consume  the  eyes, 
and  cause  sorrow  of  heart :  and 
d  ye  shall  sow  your  seed  in  vain  : 
for  your  enemies  shall  eat  it. 

y  Deut.  23.  15.  Lam.  2.  17.  Mai.  2.  2. 
z  ver.  43.  2  Kings  17.  15.  a  Deut.  28.  Go, 
66,  67,  and  32.  25.  Jer.  15.  8.  b  Deut.  23. 
22.  c  1  Sam.  2.  33.  d  Deut.  28.  33,  51.  Job 
31.  3.     Jer.  5.  17,  and  12.  13.     Mic  6.  15. 


the  heavy  burdens  laid  upon  your  backs, 
nor  hanging  down  your  heads  in  despon- 
dency and  woe. 

Threatenings  denounced  against  Diso- 
bedience. 

14.  If  ye  will  not  hearken  to  me.  Gr, 
eav  6c  jjir]  viraKOVGrjTe  fxov^  if  ye  will  not 
obey  me.  This  is  one  of  the  most  fre- 
quent uses  of  the  original  word  for 
*  hear  '  or  <  hearken.'  Chal. '  If  ye  will 
not  receive  my  word.'  So  in  v.  18. 
The  subsequent  history  of  the  Jewish 
race  affords  the  most  conclusive  evi- 
dence that  these  predictions  were  ful- 
filled with  a  fearful  exactness.  The 
limits  of  our  annotations  do  not  permit 
us  to  go  into  minute  detail,  but  the 
volumes  of  Newton  and  Keith  will  pre- 
sent a  mass  of  proof  on  this  score  which 
will  be  found  to  be  of  intense  interest, 
and  such  as  the  most  determined  skep- 
tic will  endeavor  in  vain  to  gainsay. 

16.  I  will  even  appoint  over  you 
terror,  &c.  Heb.  M^^iy  ^iJinpSH 
.  hiphkadti  alekemj  will  visit  upon  you. 
At  the  same  time,  there  is  very  good 
authority  for  interpreting  the  verb  as  is 
done  in  our  translation,  in  the  sense  of 
letting  over,  constituting  guardians  of, 
investing  with    authority.     The  true 


17  And  e  I  will  set  my  face  against 
you,  and  f  ye  shall  be  slain  before 
your  enemies;  sthey  that  hate 
you  shall  reign  over  you,  and  h  ye 
shall  flee  when  nonepursuelh  you. 

18  And  if  ye  will  not  yet  for  all 
this  hearken  unto  me,  then  I  will 
punish  you  i  seven  times  more  for 
your  sins. 

19  And  I  will  k  break  the  pride 
of  your  power;  and  I  iwill  make 
your  heaven  as  iron,  and  your 
earth  as  brass : 

20  And  your  m  strength  shall  be 

e  ch.  17.  10.  f  Deut.  28.  25.  Judg.  2.  14. 
Jer.  19.  7.  S  Ps.  106.  41.  •'  ver.  36.  Ps. 
63  5.  Pr(5v.  28.  1.  '>  1  Sam.  2.  6.  Ps.  119. 
164.  Prov.  24.  16.  k  Isai.  25.  11,  and  26.  5. 
Ezek.  7.  24,  and  30.  6.  1  Deut  28.  23. 
m  Ps.  127.  1.     Isai.  49.  4. 


force  of  the  term  in  this  form  is  to  cause 
to  preside  over,  and  Ps.  109.  6,  affords  a 
strikingly  parallel  example  ;  '  Set  thou 
a  wicked  man  over  him  (Ipttl  haph- 
k'td),  &c.'  The  language  thus  construed 
is  singularly  bold  and  striking.  Terror, 
consumption,  and  the  burning  ague  are 
personilied,  and  made  the  keepers  of  the 
disobedient  and  apostate  Israelites. 
They  haunt  their  steps  wherever  they 
go,  and  keep  them  continually  under 
the  influence  of  dismay,  feeling  indis- 
cribable  evils,  and  fearing  worse. 

18.  Then  will  I  punish  you  seven 
times  more  for  your  sins.  A  definite 
for  an  indefinite  number,  according  to 
common  usage.  The  import  is  plainly 
that  of  a  great  increase  of  their  plagues. 
These,  by  reason  of  their  continued  pro- 
vocations, were  to  become  more  and 
more  aggravated  from  age  to  age,  as 
history  proves  to  have  been  the  case. 
The  words  contain  no  allusion  to  a  pe- 
riod  of  time,  but  simply  to  the  degree 
of  their  punishment. 

19.  1  will  make  your  heaven  as  iron 
and  your  earth  as  brass.  That  is,  that 
part  of  the  heavens  which  is  over  your 
country  shall  afford  no  more  rain  than 
if  it  were  a  canopy  of  iron,  and  conse- 
quently your  earth  or  land  shall  be  as 


S68 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1491 


spent  in  vain :  for  nyour  land  shall 
not  yield  her  increase,  neither 
shall  the  trees  of  the  land  yield 
their  fruits. 

21  1[  And  if  ye  walk  contrary 
unto  me,  and  will  not  hearken  unto 
me,  I  will  bring  seven  times  more 
plagues  upon  you  according  to 
your  sins. 

22  o  I  will  also  send  wild  beasts 
among  you,  which  shall  rob  you 
of  your  children,  and  destroy  your 
catile,  and  make  you  few  in  num- 
ber, and  pyour  high-wdiys  shall  be 
desolate. 

23  And  if  ve  q  will   not  be  re- 


nDeut.  11.  17,  and  28.  IS.  Hag.  1.10. 
o  Deut.  32.  24.  2  Kings  17.  25.  Ezek.  5.  17, 
and  14.  15.  P  Judg.  6.  6.  2  Chron.  15.  5. 
Isai.  38.  8.  Lam.  1.  4,  Zech.  7.  14.  q  Jer. 
2.  30,  and  5.  3.    Amos  4.  6-12. 


barren  of  fruit  as  though  the  soil  were 
brass. 

21.  If  ye  u-alk  contrary  unto  me. 
Heb.  "lip  keri,  a  term  of  doubtful  im- 
port, as  appears  from  the  marginal  read- 
ing of  our  version,  '  at  all  adventures 
with  me  j'  i.  e.  heedlessly,  indiflferently, 
reckless  of  consequences.  This  sense 
is  adopted  by  the  Hebrew  writers, 
though  the  Gr.  and  the  Chal.  give  that 
of '  contrariety,'  and  Gesenius  and  other 
lexicographers  define  it  by  '  hostile  en- 
counter,' or  '  going  counter'  to  any  one. 

22.  I  will  send  wild  beasts  among 
you.  A  reference  to  the  following  pas- 
sages will  show  the  literal  fulfilment, 
in  repealed  instances,  of  this  prediction : 
1  Kings  13.  24,-20.  36.  2  Kings  2.  24, 
—17. 25,  26.    Comp.  Jer.  2. 15,-4.  7,— 

8.  17,-15.  3,— Ezek.  5.  17. IT  Your 

high-ways  shall  be  desolate.  For  the 
truth  of  this  see  Judg.  5.  6, 2  Chron. 
15. 5,  Is.  33.  S. 

24.  Will  punish  you  yet  seven  times 
for  your  sins.  With  seven-fold  greater 
severity. 

25.  That  shall  avenge  the  quarrel  of 
my  covenant.  That  shall  execute  ven- 
geance for  the  violation  of  my  covenant. 


formed  by  me  by  these  things,  but 
will  walk  contrary  unto  me; 

24  i-Then  will  I  also  walk  con- 
trary unto  you,  and  will  punish 
you  yet  seven  times  for  your  sins. 

25  And  si  will  bring  a  sword 
upon  you,  that  shall  avenge  the 
quarrel  of  my  ODvenant :  and  when 
ye  are  gathered  together  within 
your  cities,  tj  will  send  the  pesti- 
lence among  you  :  and  ye  shall  be 
delivered  into  the  hand  of  the 
enemy. 

26  ^  And  when  I  have  broken  the 
staff  of  your  bread,  ten  women  shall 
bake  your  bread  in  one  oven,  and 

r  2  Sam.  22.  27.  Ps.  IS.  26.  s  Ezek.  5.  17, 
and  6.  3,  and  14.  17,  and  29.  8,  and  33.  2. 
t  Numb.  14.  12.  Deut.  28.  21.  Jer.  14.  12, 
and  24. 10,  and  29,  17,  18.  Amos  4.  10.  "  Ps. 
105.  16.  Isai.  3.  1.  Eiek.  4.  16,  and  5.  16, 
and  14.  13. 

Chal.  *  That  shall  avenge  on  you  the 
vengeance  for  that  ye  have  transgressed 
against  the  words  of  the  law.'  So  in 
Jer.  50. 28,  mention  is  made  of  the  '  ven- 
geance of  the  Lord's  temple,'  by  which 
is  meant  the  punishment  of  the  Baby- 
lonians for  robbing   and  burning   the 

temple. IT  I  will  send  the  pestilence 

among  you.  Gr.  Oavaroi,  the  death. 
Chal.  id.  See  Note  on  Ex.  5.  3.  It 
implies  the  cutting  oflT  by  death  of  man 
and  beast.    See  Ezek.  14.  19,  21. 

26.  Ten  women  shall  bake  your  bread 
in  one  oven.  That  is,  there  shall  be 
such  a  scarcity  of  bread  that  one  ordi- 
nary oven  shall  answer  for  the  baking 
of  ten,  that  is  a  great  many  families, 
whereas  in  common  circumstances  one 
oven  would  serve  for  one  family.  The 
editor  of  the  Pict.  Bible  gives  some- 
what of  a  different  turn  to  the  expres- 
sion. *In  the  note  to  chap.  2.  4,  we 
remarked  that  in  the  East  it  was  a  gen- 
eral custom  for  families  to  bake  their 
own  bread  in  the  sort  of  ovens  which 
we  there  described.  The  performance 
of  this  duty  always  falls  to  the  lot  of 
the  women.  These  ovens  are,  as  we 
have  seen,  small,  and  only  suited  to  the 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 


they  shall  deliver  you  your  bread 
again  by  weight:  and  *ye  shall 
eat  and  not  be  satisfied. 

27  And  yif  ye  will  not  for  all  this 
hearken  unto  me,  but  walk  con- 
trary unto  me ; 

23  Then  I  will  walk  contrary 
unto  you  also  zin  fury ;  and  1,  even 
I,  will  chastise  you  seven  times  for 
your  sins. 

»  Isai.  9.  20.  Mic.  6.  14.  Hag.  1.  6. 
y  ver  21,  '24,  z  Isai.  59.  18,  and  63.  3,  and 
CG.  15.    Jer  21.  5.    Ezek.  5.  13,  15,  and  a.  18. 


use  of  one  family  ;  but  it  is  by  no  means 
impossible  to  bake  at  one  of  them  an 
adequate  suppl)'-  of  bread  for  ten  fami- 
lies, aliliough,  of  course,  the  process 
would  consume  time.  We  therefore  do 
not,  with  most  expositors,  understand 
scarcity  to  be  implied  in  the  simple  fact 
llial  len  families  baked  their  bread  in 
an  oven  for  one  ;  but  that  ten  families, 
represented  by  their  females,  clubbed 
their  dough  together,  and  the  produce 
being  no  more  than  an  ordinary  supply 
for  one  family,  it  was  baked  in  one 
oven,  instead  of  each  family,  as  usual, 
making  a  separate  baking.  Afterwards, 
the  caUes  ihus  baked  were  proportioned 
by  weight  to  the  respective  contributors 
— so  precious  was  the  bread.  This  is 
implied  in  the  words,  '  shall  deliver 
you  your  bread  again  by  weight ;' 
which  shows  that  the  bread  was  pre- 
viously theirs,  and  had  been  baked  for 
them,  not  that  it  was  sold  to  them  by 

weight.' IT  Shall  deliver  you   your 

bread  again  by  weight.  No  language 
could  be  more  expressive  of  the  extrem- 
ities to  which  they  should  be  reduced. 
As  the  survivors  of  a  shipwreck,  who 
put  to  sea  in  an  open  boat,  are  often 
reduced  to  the  most  stinted  allowance, 
and  have  a  small  quantity  of  food  and 
drink  served  out  to  them  by  weight  and 
measure,  so  should  it  be  in  the  extrem- 
ity of  famine  to  which  the  Israelites 
should  be  brought  by  their  disobedience. 
In  allusion  to  this  it  is  threatened  again, 
Ezek.  4.  16,  17,  '  I  will  break  the  staff 
23* 


29  a  And  ye  shall  eat  the  flesh  of 
your  sons,  and  the  flesh  of  your 
daughters  shall  ye  eat. 

30  And  b  I  will  destroy  your  high 
places,  and  cut  down  your  images, 
and  c  cast  your  carcasses  upon  the 
carcasses  of  your  idols,  and  my 
soul  shall  d  abhor  you. 


a  Deut.  28.  53.  2  Kings  6.  29.  Ezek.  5. 
10.  Lam.  4.  10.  b  2  Chron.  34.  3.  4,  7. 
Isai.  27.  9.  Ezek.  6.  3,  4,  5,  6,  13.  c  2 
Kings  23.  20.  2  Chron.  34.  5.  d  Lev.  20.  23. 
Ps.  78.  69,  and  89.  38.     Jer.  14.  19. 


of  bread  in  Jerusalem,  and  they  shall 
eat  bread  by  weight,  and  with  care,  and 
they  shall  drink  water  by  measure,  and 
with  astonishment ;  that  they  may  want 
bread  and  water,  and  be  astonied  one 
with  another,  and  consume  away  for 
their  iniquity.' 

29.  Ye  shall  eat  the  flesh  of  your  sons, 
&c.  This  was  literally  fulfilled  at  the 
siege  of  Samaria,  2  Kings  6.  29,  in  the 
days  of  Jehoram,  and  also  in  that  of 
Jerusalem,  under  Titus.  Josephus, 
J.  W.  B.  7,  c.  2,  gives  an  instance  in 
dreadful  detail,  of  a  woman  named 
Mary,  who  in  the  height  of  the  famine, 
during  the  siege,  killed  her  infant  child, 
roasted,  and  had  eaten  part  of  it  when 
discovered  by  the  soldiers.'  The  fear- 
ful accomplishment  of  the  threatened 
punishment  is  thus  bewailed  by  Jere- 
miah, Lam.  4.  10,  '  The  hands  of  the 
pitiful  women  have  sodden  their  own 
children ;  they  were  their  meat  in  the 
destruction  of  the  daughter  of  my 
people.' 

30.  I  will  destroy  your  high  places. 
What  those  were  is  not  agreed,  but 
probably  they  were  raised  places,  arti- 
ficial eminences,  upon  which  they  were 
wont  to  worship  their  idols.  The  word 
rendered  '  images '  clearly  denotes  some 
specie?  of  idol,  though  of  what  particu- 
lar kind  is  doubtful.  Comp.  2  Chron. 
34.  7.  The  probability  is  that  they 
were  some  kind  of  idolatrous  fabrica- 
tion, dedicated  to  the  sun. IT  And 

cast  your  carcasaes  upor  the  carcasses 


270 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1491. 


31  e  And  I  will  make  your  cities 
waste,  and  f  bring  your  sanctuaries 
unto  desolation,  and  I  will  not 
smell  the  savour  of  your  sweet 
odours. 

e  Neh.  2.  3.  Jer.  4.  7.  Ezek.  6.  6.  (  Ps. 
74.  7.    Lam.  1.  10.     Ezek.  9.  6,  and  21.  7. 


of  your  idols.  They  shall  be  denied  a 
seemly  burial  or  a  quiet  repose  in  their 
graves.  Thus  Ezek.  6.  4,  5, 13, '  I  will 
cast  down  your  slain  men  before  your 
idols ;  and  I  will  lay  the  dead  carcasses 
of  the  children  of  Israel  before  their 
idols  ;  and  I  will  scatter  your  bones 
round  about  your  altars.'  Coinp.  2  Kings 
23.  20.     2  Chron.  34.  5. 

31.  I  will  make  your  cities  waste. 
The  fulfilment  of  this  minatory  predic- 
tion has  been  so  signal,  that  we  cannot 
refrain  from  inserting  from  Keith  the 
following  graphic  illustration  of  its 
effects.  '  By  the  concurring  testimony 
of  all  travellers,  Judea  may  now  be 
called  a  field  of  ruins.  Columns,  the 
memorials  of  ancient  magnificence,  now 
covered  with  rubbish,  and  buried  under 
ruins,  may  be  found  in  all  Syria.  From 
Mount  Tabor  is  beheld  an  immensity 
of  plains,  interspersed  with  hamlets, 
fortresses,  and  heaps  of  ruins.  Of  the 
celebrated  cities  Capernaum,  Bethsaida, 
Gadara,  Tarichea,  and  Chorazin,  no- 
thing remains  but  shapeless  ruins. 
Some  vestiges  of  Emmaus  may  still  be 
seen.  Cana  is  a  very  paltry  village. 
The  ruins  of  Tekoa  present  only  the 
foundations  of  some  considerable  build- 
ings. The  city  of  Nain  is  now  a  ham- 
let. The  ruins  of  the  ancient  Sapphura 
announce  the  previous  existence  of  a 
large  city,  and  its  name  is  still  preserved 
in  the  appellation  of  a  miserable  village 
called  Sephoury.  Loudd,  the  ancient 
Lydda  and  Diospolis,  appears  like  a 
place  lately  ravaged  by  fire  and  sword, 
and  is  one  continued  heap  of  rubbish 
and  ruins.  Ramla,  the  ancient  Arima- 
ihea,  is  in  almost  as  ruinous  a  state. 
Nothing  but  rubbish  is  to  be  found  within 
is  boundaries.     In  the  adjacent  cniintry 


32  gAnd  I  will  bring  the  land 
into  desolation :  and  your  enemies 
which  dwell  therein,  shall  be 
h  astonished  at  it. 

C  Jer.  9.  11,  and  25.  11.  IS.  I>  Deut.  28. 
37.  1  Kings  9.  8.  Jer.  18.  16,  and  19.  6. 
Ezek.  5.  15. 


there  are  found  at  every  step  dry  wells, 
cisterns  fallen  in,  and  vast  vaulted  res- 
ervoirs, which  prove  that  in  ancient 
times  this  town  must  have  been  upwards 
of  a  league  and  a  half  in  circumference. 
Caesarea  can  no  longer  excite  the  envy 
of  a  conqueror,  and  has  long  been  aban- 
doned to  silent  desolation.  The  city 
of  Tiberias  is  now  almost  abandoned, 
and  its  subsistence  precarious  ;  of  the 
towns  that  bordered  on  its  lake  there 
are  no  traces  left.  Zabulon,  once  the 
rival  of  Tyre  and  Sidon,  is  a  heap  of 
ruins.  A  few  shapeless  stones,  unworthy 
the  attention  of  the  traveller,  mark  the 
site  of  the  Saffre.  The  ruins  of  Jericho, 
covering  no  less  than  a  square  mile,  are 
surrounded  with  complete  desolation  _: 
and  there  is  not  a  tree  of  any  descrip- 
tion, either  of  palm  or  balsam,  and 
scarcely  any  verdure  or  bushes  to  be 
seen  about  the  site  of  this  abandoned 
city.  Bethel  is  not  to  be  found.  The 
ruins  of  Sarepta,  and  of  several  large 
cities  in  its  vicinity,  are  now  *  mere 
rubbish,  and  are  only  distinguishable 
as  the  sites  of  towns  by  heaps  of  dilapi- 
dated stones  and  fragments  of  columns.' 
How  marvellously  are  the  predictions 
of  their  desolation  verified,  when  in 
general  nothing  but  ruined  ruins  form 
the  most  distinguished  remnants  of  the 
cities  of  Israel;  and  when  the  multitude 
of  its  towns  are  almost  all  left,  with 
many  a  vestige  to  testify  of  their  num- 
ber, but  without  a  mark  to  tell  their 

name.' IT  And  bring  your  sanctua- 

ries  unto  desolation.  As  they  had, 
properly  speaking,  but  one  sanctuary, 
the  term  here  is  undoubtedly  used  in  a 
large  sense  including  the  tabernacle, 
the  temple,  and  the  various  synagogues 
scattered  over  the  land. 


B.  C.  1491.3 


CHAPTER  XXVL 


^l 


33  And  i  I  will  scatter  you  among 
the  heathen,  and  will  draw  out  a 
sword  after  you,  and  your  land 
shall  be  desolate,  and  your  cities 
waste. 

34  kThen  shall  the  land  enjoy 
her  sabbaths,  as  long  as  it  lieth 
desolate,  and  ye  be  in  your  ene- 
mies' land ;  even  then  shall  the 
land  rest,  and  enjoy  her  sabbaths, 

35  As  long  as  it  lieth  desolate  it 
shall  rest ;  because  it  did  not  rest 
in  your  i  sabbaths,  when  ye  dwelt 
upon  it. 

36  And  upon  them  that  are  left 
alive  of  you,  ^I  will  send  a  faint- 
ness  into  their  hearts  in  the  lands 
of  their  enemies;  and  ^the  sound 
of  a  shaken  leaf  shall  chase  them; 
and  they  shall  flee,  as  fleeing  from 

»  Deul.  4.  27,  and  23.  64.  Ps.  44.  11.  Jer. 
9.  16.  Ezek.  1-2.  15,  and  -20.  23,  and  22.  15. 
Zech.  7.  14.  k  ochron.  36.  21.  1  ch.  25.  2. 
w  Ez€k.  21.  7,  12,  15.  n  ver.  17.  Job.  15. 
21.     Prov.  23.  1. 

33.  I  u-ill  scatter  you  among  the  hea- 
then. Heb.  niTit  £zrah^  I  will  fan  or 
winnow  you.  The  term  properly  im- 
plies that  kind  of  scattering  which  is 
the  effect  of  vvinuowing  grain,  where 
the  chaff  is  carried  away  by  the  wind. 
Comp.  a  similar  use  of  the  word,  Ps. 
44.  12,  Zech.  7.  14 

34.  Then  shall  the  land  enjoy  her 
sabbaths  as  long  as  it  lieth  desolate. 
This  is  shown  by  Houbigant  to  have 
proved  to  be  a  historical  fact.  From 
Saul  to  the  Babylonish  captivity  are 
numbered  about  490  years,  during  which 
period  there  were  of  course  70  sab- 
baths of  years.  Now  the  Babylonish 
captivity  lasted  70  years,  and  during 
that  time  the  land  of  Israel  rested. 
Therefore  the  land  rested  just  as  many 
years  in  the  Babylonish  captivity,  as  it 
should  have  rested  sabbaths,  if  the  Jews 
had  observed  the  law  relative  to  the 
sabbatic  years. 

39.  They  that  ure  left  of  you  shall 
pine  away  in  their  iniquity.  The  most 
obvious  import  of  *  pining  away  in  ini- 


a  sword ;  and  they  shall  fall,  when 
none  pursueth. 

37  And  o  they  shall  fall  one  upon 
another,  as  it  were  before  a  sword, 
when  none  pursueth :  and  p  ye 
shall  have  no  power  to  stand  be- 
fore your  enemies. 

38  And  ye  shall  perish  among 
the  heathen,  and  the  land  of  your 
enemies  shall  eat  you  up. 

39  And  they  that  are  left  of  you 
q  shall  pine  away  in  their  iniquity 
in  your  enemies'  lands ;  and  also 
in  the  iniquities  of  their  fathers 
shall  they  pine  away  with  them. 

40  rif  they  shall  confess  their 
iniquity,  and  the  iniquity  of  their 
fathers,  with  their  trespass  which 

o  Isai.  10.  4.  See  Judg.  7.  22.  1  Sam.  14, 
15,  16.  P  Josh.  7.  12,  13.  Judg.  2.  14. 
q  Deut.  4.  27,  and  28.  65.  Neh.  1.  9.  Jer. 
3.  25,  and  29.  12,  13.  Ezek.  4.  17,  and  6.  9, 
and  20.  43,  and  24.  23,  and  33.  10,  and  36.  31. 
Hos.  5.  15.  Zech.  10.  9.  r  Numb.  5.  7.  1 
Kings  S.  33,  35,  47.  Neh.  9.  2.  Dan.  9.  3, 4. 
Prov.  23.  13.     Luke  15.  13.     1  John  1.  9. 


quity'  is,  to  consume  and  perish  in  the 
punishment  for  iniquity  ;  in  allusion  to 
which  it  is  said,  Ezek.  33.  10,  *  If  our 
transgressions  and  our  sins  be  upon  us, 
and  we  pine  away  in  them,  how  should 
we  then  live?'  Comp.  Ezek.  24.  23. 
Ainsworih  suggests  that  it  may  likewise 
imply  the  beginning  of  grace,  or  a  godly 
contrition  in  them  that  are  left,  i.  e. 
'  the  remnant,  according  to  the  election 
of  grace,'  Rom.  11.  5,  who  by  their  sore 
chastisements  are  brought  to  an  humb- 
ling consciousness  of  their  sins,  and 
made  lo  feel  that  they  are  pining  away 
in  them  ;  or  as  is  expressed  by  the  pro- 
phet, Ezek.  36.  31,  '  Ye  shall  loathe 
yourselves  in  your  own  sight  for  your 
iniquities.' 

Promises  of  restored  Favor  upon  Re- 
pentance. 
40.  If  they  shnll  confess  their  iniqui- 
ty, &c.  The  portion  contained  between 
this  verse  and  the  end,  may  be  consider- 
ed as  the  third  general  division  of  the 
chapter,  comprising  a  series  of  gracious 


272 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  14&1. 


they  trespassed  against  me,  and 
that  also  they  have  walked  con- 
trary unto  me ; 

41  And  thai  I  also  have  walked 
contrary  unto  them,  and  have 
brought  them  into  the  land  of  their 

3  See  Jer.  6.  10,  and  9.  25^  26.     Ezek.  44. 

assurances  of  retorning  favor,  upon 
their  humble  and  sincere  repentance. 
It  declares  that  if.  even  in  their  worst 
and  lowest  state,  they  should  penitent- 
ly confess  their  iniquities,  and  acknow- 
ledge the  mighty  mind  of  God  in  their 
afflictions,  and  should  meekly  accept 
them  as  the  punishment  of  their  sins, 
then  the  Lord  would  again  remember 
his  covenant  with  their  fathers,  and  re- 
store to  ihem  his  favor.  The  history 
of  the  nation ,  followed  out  in  its  details, 
confirms  the  truth  of  these  promises  no 
less  clearly  than  it  does  of  the  ihreat- 
enings  recorded  above.  Never  did  Is- 
rael repent  and  seek  the  face  of  their 
God  in  vain.  Whenever  they  returned 
to  him  in  penitence  and  prayer,  putting 
away  their  idols  and  renewing  their  obe- 
dience, he  returned  also  to  them  in  the 
various  tokens  of  his  mercy,  delivering 
them  from  their  enemies,  restoring  to 
them  the  years  which  the  canker-worm 
had  eaten,  and  blessing  them  with  peace 
and  plenty.  A  most  striking  specimen 
of  the  humble  confession  and  fervent 
prayer  here  alluded  to,  is  to  be  found  in 
the  ninth  chapters  respectively  of  Dan- 
iel, of  Ezra,  and  in  the  first  of  Nehe- 
miah.  We  there  see  which  kind  of  hu- 
miliation is  acceptable  before  God,  and 
what  gracious  expressions  of  kindness 
it  meets  with.  And  so  we  learn  from 
the  sure  word  of  prophecy,  that  there 
will  yet  come  again  a  great  and  univer- 
sal repentance  of  that  ancient,  honored, 
and  afflicted  people  ;  that  they  shall 
look  upon  him  whom  they  have  pierced 
and  mourn  ;  that  they  will  return  and 
seek  the  Lord  their  God,  and  the  spirit- 
ual David  their  king  ;  and  that  then  the 
Lord  will  set  his  hand  a  second  lime, 
and    gather    them    out    of  all  nations 


enemies;  K  then  their  »uneircum- 
cised  hearts  be  t  humbled,  and  they 
then  accept  of  the  punishment  of 
their  iniquity : 

7.  Acts  7.  51.  Rwn.  2.  29.  Col.  2.  11.  «  1 
Kings  21.  29.  2  Chron.  12.  6,  7,  12,  and  32. 
26,  and  33.  12,  13. 


among  whom  they  are  scattered,  and 
plant  them  again  in  their  own  land, 
where  they  shall  for  a  long  tract  of  ages 
be  partakers  in  the  richest  blessings  of 

the  Gospel. IT  And  the  iniquity  of 

their  fathers.  The  principle  of  the  uni- 
ty of  the  different  generations  of  the 
Jewish  race  is  recognized  all  along  the 
line  of  their  history.  The  children  were 
to  repent  of  the  sins  of  their  fathers, 
and  if  they  could  not  be  absolved  from 
their  own  sins,  except  on  condition  of 
confessing  their  fathers',  their  fathers' 
iniquities,  unrepented  of,  became  their 
own,  and  also  the  punishment  due  ta 
them. 

4L  If  then  their  uncircumcised  hearts 
he  humbled.  Chal.  '  Gross,  or  foolish, 
hearts.'  Targ.  Jon. '  Proud  hearts.'  The 
phrase  implies  a  perverse  heart  j  one 
which  prompted  them  to  resist  the  spirit 
of  God.  Accordingly  we  find  the  Jews 
in  the  apostles'  times  thus  character- 
ized  :  Acts  7.  51, '  Ye  stiff-necked  and 
uncircumcised  in  heart  and  ears,  ye  do 
always  resist  the  Holy  Ghost.'  This  is 
said  because,  as  we  learn  elsewhere, 
Rom.  2.  29,  the  true  circumcision  is  '  in 
the  heart,'  and  *  in  the  spirit.'  Con- 
formably to  this  the  prophet  complains, 
Jer.  9.  26,  that '  all  the  house  of  Israel 

are  uncircumcised  in  heart.^ 1i  Ac- 

cept  of  the  punishment  of  their  iniquity. 
Heb.  W15  !ni<  liS'T^  yirtzu  eth  avondm, 
accept  of  their  iniquity.  As  the  words 
'  iniquity  '  and  '  sin  '  are  often  used  by 
an  idiom  of  the  Hebrew  for  the  '  pun- 
ishment'  due  to  transgression,  so  to 
accept  the  same  is  meekly  and  willingly 
to  bear  it,  and  even  to  be  well  pleased 
with  it  (the  term  in  the  original  being 
the  same  with  that  employed,  v.  34,  and 
rendered  '  enjoy'),  as  the  most  suitable 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 


S73 


42  Then  will  I  u  remember  my 
covenant  with  Jacob,  and  also  my 
covenant  with  Isaac,  and  also  my 
covenant  with  Abraham  will  I  re- 


uExod.-2.24,and6.  5. 
16.  60. 


Ps.  100. 


Ezek. 


member ;  and  I  will  x  remember 
the  land. 

43  y  The  land  also  shall  be  left 
of  them,  and  shall  enjoy  her  sab- 
baths,   while    she    lieth    desolate 

-'^  Fi.  136.  23.     y  ver.  34,  35. 


means  to  bring  them  to  repentance. 
An  illustration  of  this  sentiment  occurs, 
Mic.  7.  9,  'I  will  bear  the  indignation 
ri  the  Lord,  for  I  have  sinned  against 
h:m.' 

42.  Then  will  I  remember  my  cove- 
nant. This  remembrance  on  tiie  part 
of  God  signifies  his  actual  performance 
of  the  mercies  promised  ;  as  appears 
from  Ex.  6.  5,  6,  'I  have  remembered 
my  covenant,  Sac.  and  will  bring  you  out 
from  under  the  burdens  of  the  Egyp- 
tians.' So  our  remembering  God's  pre- 
cepts is  explained,  Ps.  103.  18,  as  equi- 
valent to  doing  them.  See  Note  on 
Gen.  8.  1.  So  again  when  Christ, '  the 
horn  of  salvation,'  was  raised  up  in  the 
house  of  David,  God  is  said,  Luke  1.  72, 
'  to  perform  the  mercy  promised  to  our 
fathers,  and  to  remember  his  holy  covC' 
nant.'  It  is  somewhat  singular  that  in 
the  original,  the  preposition  answering 
to  '  with'  is  omitted  before  each  of  the 
patriarchs'  names  in  this  connexion, 
and  the  fact  ought  to  have  been  indi- 
cated by  the  usual  Italic  sign,  in  our 
version.  The  reason  of  the  omission, 
or  the  bearing  it  ought  to  have  on  the 
construction,  we  are  incompetent  to 
stale.  The  Gr.  has  p^/jffS/jo-o/^cat  rr/j  6ia- 
e?j\»3f  IukojB,  I  uill  remember  the  cove- 
nant of  Jacob,  &c.,  omitting  the  suffix 

'  my'  which  occurs  in  the  Hebrew. 

IT  Will  remember  the  land.  That  is,  to 
cause  it  to  be  repeopled  by  its  former 
inhabitants  or  their  seed. 

43.  The  land  shall  also  be  left  of  them. 
Heb.  tn^D  mehem,  which  may  be  ren- 
dered either  by  them,  or  on  their  account, 
for  their  sakes.  This  verse,  in  the 
connexion  in  which  it  stands,  is  some- 
what obscure.  As  the  tone  of  the  con- 
text is  bland  and  encouraging,  we  nat- 
urally inquire  how  it  is  that  a  transition 


is  suddenly  made  to  the  language  of 
threatening.  It  seems,  on  the  whole, 
on  comparing  it  with  what  follows,  that 
the  design  of  its  introduction  here  is  to 
heighten  the  expression  of  mercy  in 
the  ensuing  verse.  God  had  said  in  the 
preceding  verse  that  he  would  '  remem- 
ber the  land  ;'  but  the  favor  involved  in 
such  a  promise,  could  only  be  appre- 
ciated by  a  just  view  of  the  condition  to 
which  the  land  would  have  been  re- 
duced by  reason  of  the  sins  of  its  inhab- 
itants. Notwithstanding  it  should  have 
been  left  destitute  of  its  occupants,  who 
were  driven  away  into  penal  exile,  and 
should  thus  remain  desolate  and  uncul- 
tivated, enjoying  the  septennial  sabbaths 
which  had  been  denied  it  in  their  sea- 
son, yet  for  all  that,  he  would  not  for- 
get or  forego  his  mercies  ;  he  would  re- 
member the  land  by  remembering  its 
possessors, and  bringing  them  back  from 
their    dispersion    and    planting     them 

again  within  its  borders. ^  And  shall 

enjoy  her  sabbaths.  Heb.  Ti^  fin 
rr^rinS'iU  tiretz  eth  shahbethoth'ilhd.  Gr. 
irpoaiz^CTai  ra  vajSiSaTu  avrni,  shall  re- 
ceive her  sabbaths.  The  true  force  of 
the  language  in  this  verse  can  be  under- 
stood only  by  a  correct  explication  of 
the  original  word  for  '  enjoy,'  which  is 
employed  here  and  also  in  the  subse- 
quent clause,  '  shall  accept  (mi'i  yir- 
tzv)  of  the  punishment  of  their  in- 
iquity.' Its  primary  meaning  is  to  have 
pleasure,  delight,  complacency  in  any 
thing  ;  and  the  drift  of  the  passage  is 
undoubtedly  to  convey  the  idea,  by  aa 
ironical  intimation,  that  while  the  land 
in  its  desolation  was  having  pleasure  in 
its  sabbaths,  the  people  of  Israel  were 
also,  if  the  expression  could  be  allowed, 
having  pleasure  in  the  punishment  of 
their  iniquity.    There  would  at  least 


274 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1491. 


without  them :  and  they  shall  ac- 
cept of  the  punishment  of  their 
iniquity ;  because,  even  because 
they  zdespised  my  judgments,  and 
because  their  soul  abhorred  my 
statutes. 

44  Andyetfor  all  that,  when  they 
be  in  the  land  of  their  enemies,  a  I 
will  not  cast  them  away,  neither 
will  I  abhor  them,  to  destroy  them 
utterly,  and  to  break  my  covenant 

z  ver.  14.  a  Deut.  4.  31.  2  Kings  13.  -23. 
Rom.  11. -2. 

be  so  much  of  a  parallel  in  the  two 
cases,   ihat  the  same   form   of  speech 
should    be   employed    in  reference    to 
both.      It   is   indeed   a   bold  figure   of 
speech  to  represent  the  inhabitants  as 
taking  pleasure  in  the  calamities  which 
they  had  procured   to  themselves  ;  but 
as  they  had  voluntarily  incurred  them 
'  despising  tlie  judgments   of  God  and 
abhorring  his  stalules,'  when  perfectly 
aware  of  the  consequences,  was  he  not 
authorized  to  charge  them  with  having 
complacency   in    the    course   of   trans- 
gression which  tiiey  had  adopted  ?     He  j 
is  but  staling  the  legitimate  conclusion  | 
to  be  drawn   from  the  premises.     On  ' 
this  view  of  the  language  it  is  not  only  I 
strictly   proper,  but  highly  significant 
and    emphatic,  and  pointed  with   the 

Sling    of   a   well   merited   rebulce. 

IT  Because,  even  because  they  despised 
my  judgments,   &c.      The   particle   is 
here  doubled,  to  give  intensity  to  the 
alleged  reason  of  their  calamities,  and  \ 
to  inlimale  that  it  was  nothing  else  than  | 
their  deliberate  rejection  of  the  divine 
laws  wliich  had  procured  them.     If  so, ! 
had  they  any  grounds  to  be  surprised  j 
that   it  was   charged   upon    them   that 
they  preferred,  were  pleased  with,  en- 
joyed, the  natural  results  of  their  con-  ' 
duct?      This  interpretation,  it  will  be! 
seen,  perfectly  harmonizes  with   that 
given  above. 

44.  Yet  for  all  that,  when  they  be  in 
the  land  of  their  enemies,  &c.  The  his- 
tory of  the  Jewish  people  to  the  pre- 


with  them :  for  I  am  the  Lore 
their  God. 

45  But  I  will  bfor  their  sakes  re- 
member the  covenant  of  their  an- 
cestors, c  wliom  I  brought  forth  out 
of  the  land  of  Egypt  ^in  the  sight 
of  the  heathen,  that  I  might  be 
their  God  :  I  am  the  Lord. 

46  e  These  are  the  statutes,  and 

b  Rom.  11.  28.  c  ch.  22.  33,  and  25.  3S 
d  Ps.  98.  2.  Ezek.  20.  9,  14,  22.  «  ch.  27. 
34.  Deut.  6.  1,  and  12.  1,  and  33.  4.  John 
1.  17. 

sent  day,  is  a  standing  proof  of  the 
truth  of  this  merciful  declaration. 
Though  scattered  and  peeled,  and  press- 
ed down  by  an  unprecedented  weight 
of  misfortunes  from  age  to  age,  yet  they 
still  subsist  as  a  distinct  people,  and 
the  covenant  of  future  restoration  re- 
mains to  them  unbroken.  It  may  be 
remarked,  moreover,  as  their  plagues 
and  aflliciions,  as  a  people,  are  at  this 
day  vastly  mitigated,  and  every  year 
growing  less  and  less,  by  reason  of  the 
increasing  humanity  of  civil  codes  and 
a  soflened  tone  of  public  sentiment 
throughout  the  civilized  world,  we  are 
doubtless  warranted  to  believe  that  the 
period  of  their  deliverance  has  well-nigh 
arrived,  and  that  nothing  is  needed  to 
this  result  but  the  spirit  on  their  part 
of  profound  repentance  and  the  humble 
confession  here  prescribed. 

45.  I  will  for  their  sakes  remember 
the  covenant,  &;c.  That  is,  for  their 
good  and  advantage.  He  does  not  in- 
deed, in  this  connexion  expressly  assure 
them  of  their  being  brought  back  to 
their  own  land,  but  the  whole  scope  of 
the  context  requires  us  to  understand  it. 
How  could  he  effectually  remember 
them  for  good  when  in  the  land  of  their 
enemies,  otherwise  than  by  restoring 
their  captivity  ?  And  why  should  he 
refer  to  the  deliverance  from  Egypt, 
except  to  intimate  that  in  like  manner 
he  would  bring  them  to  their  own  bor- 
ders? 

46.  These  are  the  statutes,  and  judg* 


B.  C.  149i.] 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 


275 


judgments,  and  laws,  which  the 
Lord  made  between  him  and  the 
cliildren  of  Israel  ^ in  mount  Sinai 
by  the  hand  of  Moses. 

f  ch.  io.  1.     a  Numb.  6.  2.     See  Judges  1 1. 
30,  31,  39.     1  Sam,  1.  U,  23. 


tnr.nts,  and  lau's,  Sac.  This  verse  ap- 
j.o.irs  so  peculiarly  proper,  as  the  con- 
clusion of  the  whole  book;  that  il  is  ex- 
sremely  difficult  to  account  for  the  ad- 
d  lion  of  the  chapter  which  Ibllows, 
containing  matter  of  a  ceremonial  kind, 
Midi  as  would  coir.e  in  far  more  appro- 
j  naiely  in  a  preceding  part  of  the  book. 
Ad  an  Clarke  pro|joses  to  solve  the  dif- 
ficuUy  by  supposing  that  there  has  been 
MM  accidental  transposition  of  chap.  27, 
/roin  where  it  belongs,  at  the  close  of 
(Iie25ih.  Others  think  that  the  27ih  was 
added  after  tlie  book  was  finished  ;  but 
aolliing  is  certain,  and  we  have  to  re- 
ceive  the  sacred  caoon  as  we  find  it. 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 
It  is  and  always  has  been  customary 
in  different  countries  and  under  various 
systems  of  religion,  for  persons  in  pe- 
culiar circumstances  of  prosperity  or 
julversily,  to  vow  that  ihey  will  make 
certain  offerings,  or  devote  certain  pro- 
perties to  the  service  of  God.  To  such 
vows,  usually  called  "i~D  neder,  most 
of  the  present  chapter  refers.  Under 
ihe  influence  of  extraordinary  zeal  in- 
hiduals,  for  instance,  might  sometimes 
be  induced  to  consecrate  themselves, 
their  children,  or  estate,  to  God  by  what 
is  iiere  termed  a  '  singular  vow.'  But 
it.  was  possible  that  upon  reflection,  in 
a  cooler  moment,  the  person  might  re- 
gret the  step  he  had  taken,  or  particular 
circumstances  might  render  the  literal 
performance  of  this  vow  inconvenient  or 
unsuitable,  in  which  case  provision  is 
made  in  the  present  chapter  for  the  re' 
demption  of  the  persons  or  things  thus 
consecrated,  and  a  table  of  rates  is  here 
given  by  which  the  priests  were  to  be 
governed  in  iheir  estimation  of  the  value 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 

AND  the  Lord  spake  unto  Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, and  say  unto  them,  a  When  a 
man  shall  make  a  singular  vow, 

of  the  thing  vowed.  It  does  not  aj  - 
I  pear  that  it  was  the  purpose  of  the  law 
j  to  enl'oice  the  practice,  but  merelj  to 
j  place  a  natural  impulse  of  devotion  un- 
der wise  regulations.  If  an  Isra-elite 
under  such  an  impulse  sliould  bind  him- 
self or  his  child  by  a  vow,  to  be  a  ser- 
vant of  the  sanctuary,  he  might  com- 
mute that  service  by  paying  a  specified 
pecuniary  equivalent,  varying  with  sex 
and  age,  into  the  sacred  treasury  ;  and 
if  he  were  too  poor  to  pay  the  prescrib- 
ed sum,  it  was  in  the  discretion  of  the 
priest  to  fix  upon  some  other,  propor- 
tioned to  his  means.  If  the  vow  related 
to  the  gift  of  an  animal,  it  must,  by  all 
means,  be  oflTeredin  sacrifice,  if  suitable 
to  be  so  oflfered ;  and  whoever  was  de- 
tected in  attempting  to  substitute  for  it 
one  of  inferior  worth,  was  punished  by 
the  forfeiture  of  both.  If  it  were  an 
unclean  animal  that  had  been  consecrat- 
ed,  the  owner  might  still  retain  it,  if, 
on  reflection,  such  was  his  wish,  on  the 
payment  of  one-fifth  more  than  the 
priest  declared  to  be  its  value.  On  the 
same  condition  a  house  or  a  farm,  con- 
secrated as  a  religious  offering,  might 
be  redeemed.  The  estimation  of  the 
value  of  an  estate  so  consecrated  was  to 
have  reference  to  the  length  of  the  inter- 
val between  the  time  of  the  consecration 
and  a  jubilee  year,  at  which  time  it  re- 
verted to  its  owner;  and  this  provision 
held  equally  good,  if  liie  estate  conse- 
crated was  one  of  which  the  devotee 
was  only  a  tenant.  But  the  details  of 
the  various  provisionsof  the  present  law 
will  come  before  us  as  we  proceed. 

The  Law  of  a  Singular  Vow  when  it 
had  respect  to  Persons. 
2.  When  a  man  shall  make  a  singular 
vow.     Heb.  "ins  fci^D'i  "^3  D^i<  ish  k\ 


276 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1491. 


the  persons  shall  he  for  the  Lord, 
by  thy  estimation. 

3  And   thy  estinaation   shall  be, 
of  the  male  from  tAventy  years  old 


yaplili  Jiider,  a  mati  when  he  shall  have 
singled  out,  separated,  signalized  a  vow. 
The  word  's-ingular'  in  our  version  is 
doubtless  tanlamoiint  to  extraordinary, 
and  yet  as  there  is  no  corresponding 
epithet  in  the  original,  the  idea  is  in- 
volved in  the  force  of  the  verb  J*^£*i 
yaphii=i~\^Zi''  yaphleh,  which  latter, as 
we  have  seen  (Note  on  Ex.  8.  22,)  has 
the  import  of  separating  or  setting 
apart  in  a  ironderful  and  glorious  man- 
ner. The  usage  is  still  farther  illus- 
trated by  reference  to  the  case  of  the 
Nazarite,  Num.  6.  2,  '  When  a  man  or 
woman  shall  separate  (iiO^^  yaphli) 
to  vow  a  vow,'  &c.,  1.  e.  shall  signally 
separate.      It   is  rendered   by  the   Gr. 

6s  av  fi£ya\b>i  ev^Erai  cvxr}P,  whoever  shall 

greatly  vow  a  vow.  So  here  the  idea 
is  of  vowing  something  in  a  signal  way, 
in  a  mode  striking  and  extraordinary. 
By  Philo  this  kind  of  vow  is  termed 
evx^rj  ^leyaXri,  the  great  voiv,  as  being  an 
act  of  special  and  distinguished  devo- 
tion. The  epithet  *  singular,'  there- 
fore, in  this  connexion  is  equivalent  to 

'  singling  out.' IT  The  persons  shall 

be  Jor  the  Lord,  by  thy  esti7nation. 
Heb.  mn-i^  r'i'53  "j^^S^n  beerkekd 
nephushoth  laihovah,  by  thy  estimation 
the  souls,  or  persons  (shall  be)  for  the 
Lord.  A  man  might  dedicate  himself 
to  the  service  of  the  sanctuary,  and  be- 
come, as  it  were,  a  servant  attached 
thereto.  In  the  same  way  he  might 
vow  his  child.  Samuel  was  thus  devot- 
ed by  his  mother,  and  remained  in  the 
service  qf  the  sanctuary;  for  that  ap- 
propriation being  apparently  satisfacto- 
ry to  all  parties,  he  was  not  redeemed 
according  to  the  valuation  here  fixed  for 
different  ages  and  sexes.  But  the  actual 
personal  dedication  was  seldom  prac- 
tised, and  hence  the  meaning  undoubt- 
edly is,  that  the  service  of  the  persons 


even  unto  sixty  years  old ;  even 
thy  estimation  shall  be  fifty  shekels 
of  silver,  ^  after  the  shekel  of  the 
sanctuary. 

b  ExcmI.  30.  l.-J. 

thus  devoted  was  not  usually  to  be  em- 
ployed in  the  sanctusiry,  but  a  value  set 
upon  it  by  the  priest,  and  that  eniployetJ 
for  the  Lord,  i,  e.  for  holy  uses  in  gen- 
eral. The  reason  for  this  substitution 
probably  was,  that  there  was  a  suffi- 
cient number  of  persons  officially  de- 
signated for  all  the  various  work  of  the 
tabernacle  ;  and  this  a  more  numerous 
attendance  would  merely  encumber  and 
retard.  On  the  expression  '  thy  estima- 
tion,' commentators  have  disputed 
whose  estimation  as  intended  ;  whether 
that  of  the  priest,  the  ruler,,  or  the  wor- 
shipper, to  be  made  from  time  to  time. 
The  obvious  sense  would  seem  tobe,thal 
it  is  addressed  to  the  people  at  large. 
It  is  the  language  of  law  addressed  to 
the  community  for  which  it  is  designed, 
RosenmuUer  however,  suggests  that  the 
original  word  "tD"^^  erkeku  is  here  to 
be  taken  not  in  an  active  but  passive 
sense — the  estimation  at  which  thou 
shalt  be  rated.  It  was  not,  he  re- 
marks, the  province  of  any  individual 
to  fix  the  rate  of  redemption,  not  even 
of  the  priest,  except  in  the  cases  men- 
tioned v.  8,  12,  but  of  God  himself,  who 
in  the  present  chapter  proceeds  to  spe- 
cify the  terms  on  his  own  sovereign 
authority.  This  construction  differs  lit- 
tle from  that  we  have  given. 

3.  Thy  estimation  shall  be  of  the 
male,  &c.  He  begins  with  the  male, 
and  that  too  in  the  prime  of  life, 
when  his  services  would  be  most  valu- 
able ;  and  it  will  be  observed  that  the 
rate  is  the  same  for  persons  of  all  con- 
ditions, to  show  that  God  regarded  the 
vow,  and  not  the  rank  of  those  who 
made  it.  The  estimation  in  this  case 
was  to  be  50  shekels  of  silver,  which 
reckoned  in  our  currency  would  be  not 
far  from  $36.  For  a  woman  of  the 
same  age  about  $?2 }  fur  a  boy  from 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 


S77 


4  And  if  it  be  a  female,  then  thy 
estimation  s-hall  be  thirty  shekels. 

5  And  if  tf  be  from  five  years  old 
even  unto  twenty  years  old,  then 
thy  estimation  shall  be  of  the  male 
iweniy  shekels, and  for  the  female 
ten  shekels. 

6  And  if  it  be  from  a  month  old 
even  unto  five  years  old,  then  thy 
estimation  shall  be  of  the  male  five 
shekels  of  silver,  and  for  the  female 
I hy  estimation  s/ia/Z  be  three  she- 
kels of  silver. 

7  And  iHt  be  from  sixty  years  old 
and  above ;  if  it  be  a  male,  then  thy 

five  to  twenty,  $15;  for  a  girl  of  the 
same  age,  $12  5  a  male  child,  $4;  a 
female,  $3 ;  a  man  above  sixty,  $11  ;  a 
woman,  $6.  The  rules  of  mortality  are 
the  prirtciple  on  which  these  rates  are 
graduated.  The  value  was  regulated 
according  to  the  probability  of  life  and 
service.  None  wer5  vowed  under  a 
month  old  :  and  the  first-born,  being 
considered  by  a  prior  law,  Ex.  12.,  the 
Lord's  property,  could  not  be  vowed  at 
at  all. 

4.  If  it  he  a  female.  The  estimation 
of  a  female  is  here  fixed  at  little  more 
than  one  half  that  of  a  man,  for  the  ob- 
vious reason  that  a  woman  if  employed 
would  not  be  of  so  much  service  in  the 
sanctuary  as  the  man.  It  is  supposed, 
with  great  probability,  that  under  the 
provision  contained  in  this  case  Jeph- 
ihah  might  have  redeemed  his  daughter. 
See  the  point  discussed  at  full  length  in 
the  Note  on  Judg.  11.  30. 

5.  If  it  be  from  five  years  old,  &c. 
It  is  supposed  in  this  case  that  the  vow 
was  made  by  the  parents,  or  one  of 
them,  and  not  by  the  child  himself,  who 
at  that  age  was  wholly  incompetent  to 
such  a  thing.  Samuel,  who  was  thus 
vowed  to  God,  was  not  redeemed,  be- 
cause he  was  a  Levite  and  a  particular 
favorite,  and  therefore  was  employed 
in  his  childhood  in  the  service  of  the 
sanctuary. 

8.  If  he  be  poorer  than  thy  estimation. 
24 


estimation  shall  be  fifteen  shekels, 
and  for  the  female  ten  shekels. 

8  But  if  he  be  poorer  than  thy 
estimation,  then  he  shall  present 
himself  before  the  priest,  and  the 
priest  shall  value  him :  according 
to  his  ability  that  vowed  shall  the 
priest  value  him. 

9  And  if  it  be  a  beast  whereof 
men  bring  an  offering  unto  the 
Lord,  all  that  any  ma7i  giveih  of 
such  unto  the  Lord  shall  be  holy. 

10  He  shall  not  alter  it,  nor 
change  it,  a  good  for  a  bad,  or  a 
bad  for  a  good  :  and  if  he  shall  at 

That  is,  if  he  who  made  the  vow  be  not 
able  to  pay  the  estimated  value,  then 
the  priest  shall  rate  the  value  according 

to   his   ability   to   pay. IT  Then  he 

shall  present  himself.      Heb.  TI"i?23>n 

I  heemido,  he  shall  make  him  to  stand  ; 

'  i.  e.  the  man  who  vowed  shall  present 

'  either  himself  or  the  subject  of  his  vow. 

The  term  in  the  original  is  so  framed 

as  to  include  both. 

Respecting,  Beasts  that  are  vowed  and 
their  Valuation. 

9.  A  beast   whereof  men    bring  an 

j  offering.  That  is,  of  the  prescribed 
j  kinds  of  which  they  are  accustomed 
j  to  bring  an  offering  ;  by  which  is  meant 
\  clean  beasts,  unblemished,  viz.  bullocks, 
I  sheep,  or  goals.  These  could  not  be 
i  redeemed  ;  and  the  firstlings,  being  al- 
j  ready  consecrated  to  God,  could  not  be 

j  thus  devoted. IT  Shall  be  holy.    Set 

j  apart  for  God's  service  according  to  the 
j  nature  of  the  vow  ;  that  is  to  say,  it 
shall  be  offered  at  the  altar  if  given  or 
vowed  for  sacrifice  ;  or  shall  be  given 
to  the  Priests  or  Levites  if  vowed  for 
that  end  ;  or  shall  be  sold  and  the  value 
of  it  employed  in  the  service  of  the 
sanctuary,  if  given  with  that  intention  ; 
or  left  at  large  to  be  disposed  of  as 
should  be  deemed  most  meet  for  the 
service  of  God. 

10.  lie  shall  not  alter  or  change  it. 
By  '  alter'  here  is  probably  meant  the 


278 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1491. 


all  change  beast  for  beast,  then  it 
and  the  exchange  thereof  shall  be 
holy. 

11  Andifil  be  any  unclean  beast, 
of  which  they  do  not  offer  a  sacri- 
fice unto  the  Lord,  then  he  sliall 
present  the  beast  before  the  priest  : 

12  And  the  priest  shall  value  if, 
whether  it  be  good  or  bad  :  as  thou 
valuest  it  u-ko  art  the  priest,  so 
shall  it  be. 

13  cEut  if  he  will  at  all  redeem 
it,  then  he  shall  add  a  fifth  part 
thereof  unto  thy  estimation. 


substituting  any  other  kind  of  beast  or 
any  other  thing  in  its  stead;  whereas 
to  '  change  '  it  is  to  give  any  other  beast 
of  the  same  species  in  its  place.  What- 
ever was  consecrated  to  God  by  a  vow 
or  purpose  of  heart  was  considered  from 
that  moment  as  the  Lord's  property ; 
to  change  which  was  impiety  ;  to  with- 
hold it  sacrilege. IT  Then  it  and  the 

exchange  shall  be  holy.  That  is,  both 
of  them  shall  be  consfdered  as  conse- 
crated to  the  Lord,  and  henceforth  his 
property.  The  man  was  thus  to  be 
mulcted  for  his  rashness,  and  the  Jew- 
ish canonists  say  that  he  was  to  be 
beaten  with  stripes  in  addition. 

IL  And  if  it  be  any  unclean  beast. 
This  may  be  understood  generally  of 
all  unclean  beasts,  such  as  asses,  cam- 
els, or  other  beasts  of  burden,  which 
men  might  be  prompted  to  vow,  with 
the  excejition  of  the  dog-,  of  which  it  is 
said,  Deut.  23.  18,  *  Thou  shalt  not 
bring  the  price  of  a  dog  into  the  house 
of  the  Lord  thy  God  for  any  vow.'  The 
Hebrews,  however,  understood  it  of 
oxen,  shee]),  or  goats,  upon  which  any 
blemishes  were  found,  whereby  they 
became  unclean,  and  were  rendered  un- 
lawful to  be  ofll'ered  upon  the  altar. 

12.  Whether  it  be  good  or  bad.  That 
IS,  whether  it  be  of  great  or  small  value. 

13.  But  if  he  will  at  all  redeem  it, 
&c.  It  was  at  the  man's  option  either 
to  leave  the  beast  with  the  priest,  or  to 


14  ^  And  when  a  man  shall 
sanctify  his  house  to  be  holy  unto 
the  Lord,  then  the  priest  shall  es- 
timate it,  whether  it  be  good  or 
bad:  as  the  priest  shall  estimate 
it,  so  shall  it  stand. 

15  dAnd  if  he  that  sanctified  it 
will  redeem  his  house,  then  he 
shall  add  the  fifth  part  of  the 
money  of  thy  estimation  unto  it, 
and  it  shall  be  his. 

16  And  if  a  man  shall  sanctify 
unto  the  Lord  some  part  of  a  field 

d  ver.  13. 

pay  him  the  price  at  which  he  had 
rated  it.  If  lie  chose  the  latter,  it  was 
a  sign  that  he  deemed  it  worth  more 
than  the  price  which  the  priest  had  set 
upon  it.  The  law  was  probably  in- 
tended to  prevent  rash  vows,  by  annex- 
ing somewhat  of  a  penalty  to  them  in 
the  form  of  a  peccmiary  fine. 

The  Estimation  of  a  devoted  House. 

14.  When  a  man  shall  sanctify  his 
house  to  be  holy  unto  the  Lord.  That 
is,  sanctify  or  set  it  apart  by  a  dedi- 
cating vow. T[  As  the  priest  shall 

estimate  it,  so  shall  it  stand.  That  is, 
such  shall  the  value  be,  neither  less  nor 
more  ;  no  man  shall  attempt  to  alter  it ; 
only  the  owner  if  he  would  redeem  it 
was  to  give  the  additional  fifth  part  of 
the  value  ;  inasmuch  as  he  should  have 
considered  well  before  he  vowed  it. 

The  Estimation  of  a  devoted  Field. 

16.  Part  of  afield  of  his  possession. 
The  phrase  '  field  of  one's  possession  * 
signifies  a  field  inherited  from  one's 
forefathers,  and  is  used  in  contradis- 
tinction from  a  '  field  which  one  hath 
bought,'  spoken  of  v.  22.  Though  the 
words  *  some  part'  are  not  expressed  in 
the  original,  yet  it  is  generally  allowed 
that  they  should  here  be  supplied  ;  as 
it  was  not  lawful  for  a  man  in  this 
manner  to  alienate  his  whole  patri- 
mony.    He  might  express  his  good  will 


B.  C.  1491.] 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 


279 


of  his  possession,  then  thy  estima- 
tion shall  be  according  to  the  seed 
thereof:  an  homer  of  barley  seed 
shall  be  valued  at  fifty  shekels  c-f 
silver. 

17  If  he  sanctify  his  field  from  the 
year  of  jubilee,  according  to  thy 
estimation  it  shall  stand. 

IS  But  if  he  sanctify  his  field  after 
the  jubilee,  then  the  priest  shall 
e  reckon  unto  him  the  money  ac- 
cording to  the  years  that  remain, 
even  unto  the  year  of  the  jubilee, 
and  it  shall  be  abated  from  thy 
estimation. 

19  f  And  if  he  that  sanctified  the 
field  will  in  any  wise  redeem  it, 
then  he  shall  add  the  fifth  'part  of 
the  money  of  thy  estimation  unto 
it,  and  it  shall   be  assured  to  him. 

20  And  if  he  will  not  redeem  the 
field,  or  if  he  have  sold  the  field 
to  another  man,  it  shall  not  be  re- 
deemed any  more.  • 

e  ch.  25, 15,  16.     f  ver.  13. 


for  the  house  of  God,  but  he  must  not 
for  this  purpose  impoverish  his  own 

family, IT  Thy  estimation  shall  be 

according  to  the  seed  thereof.  That  is, 
according  to  the  quantity  of  the  seed 
required  for  sowing  it ;  or  perhaps  ac- 
cording to  the  quantity  of  the  produce. 

IT  An  homer  of  barley  seed  shall  be 

valued  at  fifty  shekels  of  silver.  The 
meaning  is,  that  as  much  land  as  re- 
quired a  homer  of  barley  to  sow  it 
should  be  valued  at  fifty  shekels  of 
silver.  The  homer  was  very  different 
from  the  omer  ;  the  latter  held  about 
three  quarts,  the  former  sevenly-five 
gallons  and  three  pints. 

18.  If  he  sanctify  his  field  after  the 
jubilee,  &c.  That  is,  the  field  shall  be 
reckoned  more  or  less  in  value  accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  years  remaining 
to  the  year  ofjubilee. 

20.  if  he  have  sold  the  field.  That 
is,  if  the  priest  have  sold  it  to  another 
man,  he  who  vowed  it,  could  not  then 
redeem  it,  though  he  bad  the  option  of 


21  But  the  field,  g  when  it  goeth 
out  in  the  jubilee,  shall  be  holy 
unto  the  Lord,  as  a  field  ^  devoted  : 
i  the  possession  thereof  shall  be 
the  priest's. 

22  And  if  a  7nan  sanctify  unto  the 
Lord  a  field  which  he  hath  bought, 
which  is  not  of  the  fields  of  this 
possession  ; 

23  1  Then  the  priest  shall  reckon 
unto  him  the  worth  of  thy  estima- 
tion, even  unto  the  year  of  the  ju- 
bilee :  and  he  shall  give  thine 
estimation  in  that  day,  as  an  holy 
thing  unto  the  Lord. 

24  mln  theyearof  the  jubilee  the 
field  shall  return  unto  him  of  whom 
it  was  bought,  even  to  him  to 
whom  the  possession  of  the  land 
did  belong. 

25  And  all  thy  estimations  shall 
be  according  to  the  shekel  of  the 

S  ch.  25.  10,  23,  31.  h  ver.  28.  '  Numb. 
18.  14.  Ezek.  44.  29.  k  ch.  25.  10,  25. 
1  ver.    18.    m  ch.   25.    28. 


doing  so  before  ;  and  if  he  who  vowed 
It  did  not  redeem  it '  when  it  goeth  out 
(of  the  possession  of  the  purchaser),  in 
the  jubilee,  it  shall  be  holy  (set  apart) 
unto  the  Lord,  as  a  field  devoted  (to 
his  service)  ;  the  possession  thereof 
shall  be  the  priest's,'  v.  21,  and  the  per- 
son  who  vowed  it  could  never  redeem  it. 

22-24.  If  a  man  sanctify  unto  the 
Lord  a  field  which  he  hath  bought. 
Consequently  a  field  which  was  no  part 
of  his  patrimonial  inheritance,  but 
which  he  had  obtained  by  purchase 
from  another  source.  When  landed 
property  of  this  kind  was  vowed,  and 
of  which  the  purchase  or  lease  was  to 
expire  at  the  next  jubilee,  the  priest 
was  to  fix  a  value  upon  it  according  to 
the  number  of  years  that  should  inter- 
vene till  the  next  jubilee,  and  the  vower 
might  either  redeem  it  or  leave  it  to  the 
priests ;  but  whichever  he  did,  it  was 
to  return  of  course  at  the  jubilee  to  the 
original  owner  or  his  heirs. 

25.  All  thy  estimation  shall  be  accord 


280 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1491. 


sanctuary:  n twenty  gerahs  shall 
be  the  shekel. 

26  H  Only  the  o  firstling  of  the 
beasts,  which  should  be  the  Lord's 
firstling,  no  man  shall  sanctify  it; 
whether  it  be  ox,  or  sheep  :  it  is 
I  he  Lord's. 

27  And  if  il  be  of  an  unclean 
beast,  then  he  shall  redeem  it  ac- 
cording to  thine  estimation,  I' and 

n  Exod.  30.  13.  Numb.  3.  47,  and  13.  16. 
Ezek.  45.  1-2.  o  Exod.  13.  -2,  U,  and  '2-2.  30. 
Numb.  18.  17.    Deut.  1.5.  19.    P  ver.  11,  12,  13. 

ing  to  the  shekel  of  the  sanctuary.  So 
called,  it  is  supposed,  from  the  fact  that 
the  standard  of  this  as  the  foundation 
of  all  the  other  weights  and  measures 
was  kept  in  the  sanctuary.  A  literal 
rendering  however  of  the  original  may 
be  '  shekel  of  sanctity,  or  holiness  ;'  i.  e. 
a  true,  just,  honest  shekel. 

Firstlings  not  to  be  Vowed. 

26.  Only  the  firstling  of  the  beasts, 
&e.  These  all  belonged  to  God,  by 
virtue  of  a  previous  express  law,  Ex.  13. 
2,  12,  13,-22,  30,  and  it  would  be  a 
kind  of  mockery  to  make  an  offering  to 
another  of  that  which  was  his  own 
before. 

The  Redemption  of  unclean  Beasts. 

27.  And  ifil  be  of  an  unclean  beast. 
This  is  understood  by  Jarchi,  of  such 
unclean  beasts  as  are  spokenofv.il, 
which  a  man  set  apart  by  vow  '  to  the 
repairs  of  the  sanctuary.'  Others,  how- 
ever, understand  it  o(  the  firstling  males 
of  unclean  beasts,  which,  as  they  were 
not  consecrated  to  God  by  law,  might 
be  dedicated,  or  rather  the  proceeds  of 
them,  as  votive  offerings.  Because  an 
unclean  beast  might  not  be  offered  in 
sacrifice,  it  does  not  follow  that  the 
price  of  it  might  not  be  used  in  the  re- 
pairs of  the  sanctuary  and  the  mainte- 
nance of  the  priests,  and  therefore  be 
the  subject  of  a  vow. 

Of  Things  irredeemably  devoted. 

28.  Notu-ithstanding,  no  devoted  thing. 


shall  add  a  fifth  part  of  it  thereto : 
or  if  it  be  not  redeemed,  then  it 
shall  be  sold  according  to  thy  esti- 
mation. 
28  q  Notwithstanding,  no  devoted 
thing  that  a  man  shall  devote  unto 
the  Lord  of  all  that  he  hath,  both 
of  man  and  beast,  and  of  the  field 
of  his  possession,  shall  be  sold  or 
redeemed  :  every  devoted  thing  is 
most  holy  unto  the  Lord. 

q  ver.  21.     Josli.  6.  17,  IS,  19. 


Heb.  G'^n  'herem.  Gr.  ayaOeua,  or 
curse.  This  is  not  the  "113  n'c'der  cr 
common  vow,  such  as  we  have  previous^ 
ly  considered,  but  one  of  a  far  more  sol- 
emn kind,  and  which  is  but  inadequately 
represented  by  the  term  '  devoted  thing' 
in  our  version.  It  signifies  properly  a 
vow  made  with  imprecations  or  execra- 
tions by  the  vower  on  himself  or  others 
if  that  should  not  be  done  in  which  he 
engaged.  Of  the  precise  difference  be- 
tween the  form  of  the  *T73  neder  and 
the  Cnn  'herem,  we  are  not  particularly 
informed  by  Moses,  but  it  is  clear  from 
this  passage  that  a  thing  devoted  to 
God  by  ^herem,  was  irrevocably  devoted 
beyond  the  power  of  redemption.  A 
man,  for  instance,  devoted  in  this  sol- 
emn way  an  ox,  a  cow,  a  field,  to  the 
Lord,  imprecating  a  curse  to  himself  if 
he  withheld  it,  or  ever  reclaimed  it,  and 
a  curse  upon  any  one  who  should  take 
it  away  or  alienate  it.  Such  things  by 
this  law  could  never  be  redeemed  or 
appropriated  to  any  other  use  ;  and  it 
is  evident  from  the  use  of  the  word 
'notwithstanding'  (^it  ak,  neverthe- 
less), that  this  rule  is  introduced  as  an 
exception  to  the  general  regulations 
concerning  vows  contained  in  the  pre- 
vious part  of  the  chapter,  by  which  re- 
demptions  were  amply    provided  for. 

IT  Is  most  holy  unto  the  Lord.    Heb. 

lD*^TZ3np  C^p  kodesh  kodoshim,  holi- 
ness of  holinesses.  Other  things  devoted 
by  a  sijople  vow  were  merely  holy,  but 
these,  from  the  greater  sanctity  attached 


B.  C.  14010 


CHAPTER  XXVn. 


281 


29  'None  devoted,  which  shall  be 
devoted  of  men,  shall  be  redeemed : 
but  shall  surely  be  put  to  deaih. 

30  And  3  all  the  tithe  of  the  land, 

f  Numb.  21.  2,  3.  »  Gen.  28.  22.  Numb. 
IS.  21,  24.  2  Chron.  31.  5,  6, 12.  Neh.  13. 
12.     Mai.  3.  8, 10. 


whether  of  the  seed  of  the  land,  or 
of  the  fruit  of  the  tree,  is  the 
Lord's:  it  is  holy  unto  the  Lord. 
31  t  And  if  a  man  will  at  all  re- 
deem aught  of  his  tithes,  he  shall 
add  thereto  the  fifth  pari  thereof. 

t  ver.  13. 


to  the  transaction,  were  denominated 
most  holy,  and  were  not  to  be  touched 
except  by  the  priests.  It  may  here  be 
remarked  that  the  peculiar  word  harem, 
applied  to  the  female  part  of  an  oriental 
household  establishment,  is  in  all  pro- 
bability derived  from  the  same  root 
with  ^herem,  and  carries  with  it  the 
implication  of  something  set  apart  by 
the  most  sacred  consecration,  and  which 
no  one  could  invade  without  the  danger 
of  anathema  and  destruction. 

29.  None  devoted,  which  shall  he  de- 
voted of  man,  shall  be  redeemed.  Sec 
Heb.  tSli^n  y2  min  haddam,  of  man. 
It  appears  plain,  beyond  question,  from 
V.  28,  that  human  beings  as  well  as 
brute  beasts  were  among  the  subjects 
of  the  'herem.    The  present  phrase  is 
undoubtedly    correctly   rendered    '  of 
men,'  i.  e.  as  the  subjects  of  the  vow, 
instead  of '  by  men,'  as  the  agents  of  it. 
Yet  we  can  hardly  suppose  that  the 
drift  of  the  passage  is  to  intimate  that 
a  parent  or  master  should  or  could, 
merely  from  a  sudden  religious  impulse, 
devote  a  child  or  servant  to  death,  al- 
though the  case  of  Jephlhah  approxi- 
mates very  near  to  such  a  reckless  and 
impious  act.     The  legitimate  import 
seems  to  be,  to  repeat  in  a  more  em- 
phatic manner  that  part  of  the  precept 
in  the  preceding  verse,  which  had  res- 
pect toman  ;  or,  in  other  words,  simply 
to  declare  that  when  a  person,  whether 
child  or  slave,  had  been  thus  most  sol- 
emnly and  irrevocably  given  away  to 
God,  he  was  never  on  any  consideration 
to  be  reclaimed  or  redeemed.    But  is  it 
not  said,  however,  that  '  he  shall  surely 
be  put  to  death,'  and  does  not  this  imply 
that  Israclitish  parents  and  masters  had 
the  power  of  thus  devoting  their  child- 
24* 


ren  or  slaves  to  death  ?  To  this  it  may  be 
answered  that  the  original  phrase  tn?3 
n^T^  moth  yumothj   dying  shall   die, 
may  without  violence  be  interpreted  in 
this  connexion,  not  of  any  violent  death 
in  consequence  of  the  vow,  but  simply 
that  he  should  remain  in  that  devoted 
state  until  he  died.    This  is  the  inter- 
pretation  proposed  by  several  distin- 
guished   commentators,    and,    indeed, 
considering  this  law  in  relation  to  the 
duty  oi private  individuals,  there  seems 
to  be   no  other  sense   that   does   nol 
outrage  the  spirit  of  the  divine  cede, 
which  breathes  such  a  tender  concern 
for  human  life.   But  the  subject,  it  must 
be  admitted,  assumes  another  aspect, 
when  viewed  in  relation  to  a  national 
'herem,  which  might  be  made  and  exe- 
cuted against  the  public  enemies  of  Is- 
rael,  or  those  devoted  nations  who,  by 
the  special  appointment  of  God,  were 
doomed  to  remediless  destruction.  Such 
a  vow  on  the  part  of  the  peculiar  people 
was  but  an  echo,  as  it  were,  of  the 
^herem  of  the  Almighty,  and  it  was  to 
be  punctiliously  executed.     Thus  the 
Canaanites  were  vowed  to  total  excision, 
because  God  had  thus  decreed.  Thus  too, 
the  city  of  Jericho  in  particular  was  de- 
voted. Josh.  6.  17,  and  the  inhabitants 
of  Jabesh-Gilead  were  put  to  death  for 
violating  the  curse    pronounced   upon 
those  who  came   not   up  to  Mizpeh, 
Judg.  29.  10.    Thus,  too,  if  an  Israelii- 
ish   city    introduced    the    worship  of 
strange  gods,  it  was  in  like  manner  to 
be  devoted  or  confessed  to  God,  and  to 
remain  unbuilt  for  ever.  Deut.  13. 16-18. 

The  Law  of  Tithes. 
30.  All  the  tithe  of  the  land.    The 
I  '  tithe '  of  any  thing  is  its  tenth  part. 


282 


LEVITICUS. 


[B.  C.  1491. 


32  And  concerning  the  lithe  of 
the  herd,  or  of  the  flock,  even  of 
whatsoever  upasseth  under  the 
rod,  the  tenth  shall  be  holy  unto 
the  Lord. 

33  He  shall  not  search  whether 
it  be  good  or  bad,  j' neither  shall 

"  See  Jer.  33.  13.  Ezek.  20.  37.  Mic.  7. 
14.     X  ver.  10. 


Of  the  yearly  products  of  the  land  of 
the  Israelites,  the  first-fruits  were  first 
deducted  ;  out  of  the  rest  the  tenth  part 
was  taken  for  the  Levites,  Num.  IS.  21  ; 
of  the  nine  remaining  parts,  another 
tenth  part  was  to  be  taken  and  brought 
to  Jerusalem,  and  there  eaten  by  the 
owners,  Deut.  12.  6  ;  though  this  second 
tiihe  was  every  third  year  distributed 
to  the  poor,  Deut.  28.  29. 

32.  Of  whatsoever  passeth  under  the 
rod.  This  is  thus  explained  by  the 
Rabbinical  writers  :  '  When  a  man  was 
to  give  the  tithe  of  his  sheep  or  calves 
to  God,  he  was  to  shut  up  the  whole 
flock  in  one  fold,  in  which  there  was 
one  narrow  door  capable  of  letting  out 
one  at  a  time.  The  owner  about  to 
give  the  tenth  to  the  Lord  stood  by  the 
door  with  a  rod  in  his  hand,  the  end  of 
which  was  dipped  in  vermillioa  or  red 
ochre.    The  mothers  of  these  Iambs  or 


he  change  it:  and  if  he  change  it 
at  all,  then  both  it  and  the  change 
thereof  shall  be  holy  ;  it  shall  not 
be  redeemed. 

34  y  These  are  the  command- 
ments which  the  Lord  commanded 
Moses  for  the  children  of  Israel  in 
mount  Sinai. 

y  ch.  26.  46. 


calves  stood  without ;  the  door  being 
opened,  the  young  ones  ran  out  to  join 
themselves  to  their  dams;  and  as  they 
passed  out,  the  owner  stood  with  his 
rod  over  them,  and  counted  1,  2,  3,  &c., 
and  when  the  tenth  came,  he  touched  it 
with  the  colored  rod,  by  which  it  was 
distinguished  to  be  the  tithe  calf,  sheep, 
&c.,  and  whether  poor  or  lean,  perfect 
or  blemished,  that  was  received  as  the 
legitimate  tithe.'  It  is  probably  in 
reference  to  this  custom  that  the  pro- 
phet speaking  to  Israel  says,  Ezek.  20. 
37, '  I  will  cause  you  to  pass  under  the 
rod,  and  will  bring  you  into  the  word 
of  the  covenant ;'  i.  e.  you  shall  be  once 
more  claimed  as  the  Lord's  property 
and  be  in  all  things  devoted  to  his  ser- 
vice, being  marked  or  ascertained  by 
special  providences  and  manifestations 
of  his  kindness  to  be  his  peculiar  people 


Date  Due 

Ir  ■:     - 

• 

\r 

Uis^i^msm^ 

■T' 

9 

